In this context means "who to believe". I have followed Dr. Sinclair into FDA yet-untested NMN (3 tests, 2 in USA, one in japan due 2020 or more) uniquely qualified to achieve this and persuade because he has successfully tried on mice, has fed himself and parents for 12 years, looks 20 year younger, can convince me he does not need money directly or as a front (is billionaire from invention of reservertrol, ALL age-sellers = used car salesmen!), chosen by NASA for health of Mars astronauts, tenured faculty in Harvard medicine. Only lack of manipulation angle means him and not elesium/chromadex NR. All sellers are safely considered greedy with onus of sincerity proof on them!
Given any human of even moderate intelligence, amortality (different from immortality, healthy long life span) is a natural wish, every subhuman knows it, knows how to get it, or knows teacher who can. Any scientific thinker (not a subhuman believer) must be able to derive and only derive every aspect of whatsoever considered science (All required). This constrains epistemology - every derivation is a hypothesis, derived by hunans who could be wrong. The hypothesis must rationally derive the results. Thus ONLY expect able scientists are rational skeptics. Given the paucity of developments from the first principles, a scientist must provisionally accept certain facts, has an epistemological theory of who to believe when, and forms a rational stoic. Provisional acceptance of "blood sugars by Reddy organisation" is done by me to avoid the costs of the Max hospital, but not many others. This is rational stoic decision even absent my test. It may be different for others, in some cases just as good as mine, often less rational, but always other person choice. I retain the right to argue - an agree to disagree never implies error, only pointlessness of further argumentation!
It is particularly true for NMN. Rather than NMN, let us talk of X and my belief in it. I assume that some one else praises a Y. Why is my X superior to Y!?
Unless Y is accepted in a scientific way as rational skeptic, Y is bad! At once! All religious or most atheist products fail as no scientist have bothered yet. There are still conflicts betteen elisium products, possible claims like mitoq etc. So no blanket rejection helps there! It is no different than rational sketicism applied to products, Why is one better?
Anecdotal proof against aging exisr! Not enough by itself! Cap[italist monsters from america can buy endorsements!
The endorsement must be from applicable master scientists. Reduces field to NMN, NR, elisium, mitoq etc. All these are endorsed by master-scientists.
Things like mitoq etc do not claim general fight against aging, only effectiveness against specific patholgy.
So fight remains between NR combinations, NMN, NAD+ and NADH. All are steps in conversion of niacin (natural vitamin B3 to NAD+ which all cells can use in energy Krebs cycle and thus alleviate aging symptoms. NAD+ amount continuously declines with age.
You benefit from all. However bio availability in various cells varies a lot. NAD+ directly does not enter cells. Neither does NMN! NMN has another problem - it does not easily cross blood-brain interface by itself. Niacin causes unpleasant flushing! The effects vary with form. NR and NMN cost a lot, as does NAD+ and NADH but B3 - flushing niacin or non-flushing nicotinamide form) is very cheap but glacial slow.
One way to consider situation if bio-availability depends of distance from NAD+ (which is needed). NAD+ is 0, NADH is 1/2 away. nmn is 1 away. NR is 2 away.Niacin is 3 away. No one but NR enters a cell - NMN< NAD+ and NADH must become NR to enter and must revert back to what they were. Depends on cell i.e. afflction to decide which one!
Neat solution for normal humans is some NMN and some NAD+. Latter to help Alzheimer's, essential tremors and Parkinson; all affliction of brain. How to take them? Sublingual, NAD+ at morn and post dimmer presleep, while 5 does of NMN per day. do it 4-5 days per week.
All tests are on mice now. 3 big human studies have started, safe MD data by 2020 or 2021. Freezes looks at start - bad idea to wait unless proof - there is no -ve effect (NMN,NAD+) very inactive. Just prevent liver step by sublingual!
No comments:
Post a Comment