Yes but that trial enrolled people with very early PD, just after diagnosis. So early that they were not even on meds. But we know that their prodromal PD started 10+ years before. And nicotine did not slow down the progression of their symptoms. So it’s hard to imagine why it would have slowed down the progression a few years before.
Dr. Glorioso suggests starting nicotine at age 80+. But by that age many/most people already have the Parkinson’s disease prodromal markers. It’s just that they die before developing the symptoms.
So if there’s a case for nicotine (and I’m not sure there is) it is not at age 80yo that it should be started but way earlier. The average PD patient is diagnosed at 60yo. Pre-PD symptoms start 10 to 20y before. So, if you have a higher than average PD risk, you could start nicotine at 40. And maybe low-dose selegiline (which seems to have similar PD protective properties) is more efficient
Different papers say different things but it looks like below 0.3g/d is for sure safe. And above 2g/d is for sure unsafe. Between these two extremes Also, the total exposure may matter as much as the daily dose.
Anyway, I have an elevated risk of PD, that’s why I not using metformin but SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLTi slash the PD risk by 5 and even reverse PD in animal models). Someone with a family history of severe UTIs would probably make the opposite decision. [btw, same reasoning for beta blockers (linked to high PD rates, even though it might not be causative) VS some CCB (isradipine) and some ARBs (telmisartan/candesartan) that seem to be able to slow down PD]
You’re welcome. Your profile says that you take “Metformin Canagliflozing (or other SGLT2 inhibitor) Acarbose”. How do you combine them today?
GLP1 agonists (exenatide, semaglutide, etc.) can be a good alternative to metformin as well. They have not been tested in the ITP, but they look better than metformin in longitudinal studies to prevent or delay neurodegenerative diseases.
I find I can learn more from any of these “experts” from listening to their podcasts / YT interviews, provided their interviewer is good, than reading their books. They delve more into nuances and details over a live interview which preemptively answers some of my questions or otherwise helps me make up my mind on what I think of their take compared to the relatively dry /
sterile book material.
I find Attia impressively knowledgeable on exercise issues, like he would make the world’s best personal trainer — with a focus on what you need to be fit in your old age, such as foot strength / stability. I’m recovering from a sprained ankle and learned a lot from his interviews promoting the book, which has already helped in my recovery.
Outside this subniche my opinion of his expertise does take a downward slide. When it comes to diet I think I’m honestly better informed. And I don’t think I have such a big head.
Either way, someone worth learning from, not gospel material, but then again who is?
I just started and don’t take it with every meal but rather when I eat whole grains like oats, buckwheat for breakfast or fruit and berries. My glucose is the same with Acarbose or without and stays in the range 92-97 in the morning after 12-14 h night fast. I would like to see it lower and that’s why I’m trying Acarbose. I don’t take Metformin.
You may need more real time data like from a CGM to see the differences because it’s more that acar decreases the spikes and variability than the average or morning after fasting levels.
Would be nice to get a CGM, but my insurance wouldn’t cover it bc I’m not a diabetic. Instead I poke my finger a few times a day to get a better understanding how it moves.
I don’t think anyone expected his book to sell 1 million copies by telling the truth.
It’s probably more easy to become extremely rich by telling people what they want to hear instead. Just look at the quack doctors on YouTube with tens of millions of views on youtube, supplements sales, etc.
In fact youtube and the system rewards people more for that. The youtube recommendation engine is based on what people want to watch. They will see want they want to watch.
For example I found peter attia because of a clip he had with joe rogan about longevity. That way I got information based on the objective of longevity.
If I instead got prescribed a statin by my doctor and told my cholesterol were too high, I would search on youtube about this. I was already apprehensive about medications, which I think is default, and I would see all the content about how bad statins are etc because that is what I wanted to hear.
Later on I go and post this on rapamycin.news, because I think I know so much, and I post these videos. If someone who searched for information from a higher tier, holistic perspective, cared enough, they would respond to the videos I posted. That’s not a guarantee, hence caution is needed when searching for information.
