Overview 2022

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpekArG0j14

Long, wasteful but an excellent comprehensive overview to 2022. The biggest new add is Dr. Sinclair thought on my trick – effects add usually and best way to mix – three-month singular add, to not take the useless or hurtful drug by chemical test or feelings. Great doctors do not recommend bullshit, most aging chemicals are slow acting. So three-month gap is enough for individual application, not FDA average effects.

I have posted a stinging admission of draw-back of general doctors, not personal or family, that are familiar with patient peculiarities; using FDA averages, without written analyzed seller reputation. The lack of reputation accounting is a major flaw in capitalism. The selection by advertizing or price is a severe hole. Straight unadorned capitalism in most markets leads to adulteration/corruption in all markets is inversely proportional to the gap between buying! This is not just a fable but as basic as x shaped demand and supply curves.

There are products that display natural monopolies, proportional to price, etc. The entire market behaves differently with a gap of 200 years. One can safely apply this general principle starting 1 AD.  This change is speeding up, to being 100 years now. This has to do with greatly sped-up advertisement and clustering, using technology. Privacy, essential to libertarians, is severely threatened. This is the year of conflict of centralized morality-less ideas versus decentralized less efficient but libertarian ideas. I believe that efficiency can be improved in libertarian ways.

English Thanyou

The goal of de-aging is not new - it is present in the oldest extant written telling of Gilgamesh travels in ancient Mesopotamia to cure old age, 4000 years earlier. Since then many frauds have risen.

Why isn't it a fraud this time?

The method has been proposed by several scientists who are not familiar with each other. It uses well-recognized international award methods. They are all transparently available. Not even one scientist has refused to keep his method a secret. Such an approach is the reverse of fraud. All statements are always checked. Quick claims are ignored. Clearly, no one is being forced to declare anything and/or participate unwillingly. Everyone is free to declare anything and promote their causes in any way. The only limit is the permanent ignorance of any claim by an imbecile.

Who gets old and why?

Among all antiaging interventions, dietary interventions have shown the greatest potential. Calorie restriction, without undernourishing the individual, slows down the aging process and lengthens the average and maximum life in animals of various origins. Repeated reports say that the restriction of food intake in rats extended the half and maximum life and decreased the occurrence and severity of chronic diseases. Later findings emphasized that calorie restriction has effects on lifespan in a wide range of organisms. The positive effects of caloric restriction in humans have also been shown in many studies. Calorie restriction while maintaining adequate nutrition has beneficial effects such as protection against the development of obesity, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and cancer. In a controlled study, caloric restriction with high levels of physical activity showed a decrease in blood pressure, body weight, serum cholesterol levels, insulin levels, and other anthropometric and physiological parameters. The mechanisms by which calorie restriction induces life-prolonging properties are not fully understood, but the following four potential target pathways have been suggested: activation of AMP protein kinase (AMPK) and sirtuins, inhibition of growth factor insulin-like-1 (IGF-1) signaling and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition by rapamycin. These pathways are the main hypothesized mechanisms of action of caloric restriction that control cell growth, mitochondrial function, and autophagy directly or indirectly. However, despite the proven benefits of caloric restriction, it is a difficult technique to use successfully in humans, as it is challenging to apply the treatment long-term, requiring a high level of determination and self-control. This paradox led to the discovery of compounds that mimic the outcome of caloric restriction on health and life expectancy without actual restriction in caloric intake. These compounds were called "calorie restriction mimetics" (CRMs)

Writing rational aging recommendations is my mission and explains why I seek out a doctor/nurse on my team to argue effects as devil's advocate for my research. Beyond the three here and metformin even without TAME (4th), I expect TRIIM-X to end up as 5, low dose rapamycin as 6, much more as E5 is not public yet. The most stupid idea is to compose the best of each or try them all sequentially, individually, like 5 Pandavas or 6 wives.

The three theories, determined by me to be independent, thus composable, are NAD+ boost by NMN and NO from resveratrol according to Dr. Sinclair (and argnin by itself); Senolysis through fisetin according to Dr. de Grey; and CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitamins) according to Dr. Kennedy. The FDA essentially oversees the safety and efficacy of chemicals—healthy for drugs but useless for drugs and me—critical chemicals like new aging-related chemicals. Just for these, I make referrals differently, out of ethics, not law.

My main improvement is to sidestep questions about bioavailability and drug delivery by using liposome forms of all chemicals (except NAD+ for BBB entry). Liposomes eliminate necessary medical services and work even better than injections because they bypass cells.

Safety is assumed due to the safety of low concentration of

1 Element of many fruits and vegetables with no known credible hazards

2 At least 20-30 years of safe history as a drug or supplement

3 GRAS status in US law

4 Chemical name of a body compound or intermediate

Therefore, NMN is derived from #4, Fisetin from no. No. 1, CaAKG from no. #4, arginine and resveratrol from #4. This is the personal safety and not the safety of the community, the only one for which such arguments can be made. For random communities, I recommend waiting for the FDA, unless the risk of inaction is greater than compensation aging. position

The effectiveness stems from the fact that I consider these three developers to be like double Noble award winners defending this thread.

Joint efficacy occurs from the apparent independence of the threads, NAD+ increases are needed and decrease empirically. De Grey's thread arises from the elimination of harmful senescent cells that produce SASP and CD38 in particular, buying immunity against cancer as a secondary benefit. The AKG thread is not clear, it may work due to the effective accounting of methylation marks, which prolongs cell life. Security does not end here.

There are unknown dangers from the size of the dose and interactions with other parts of these threads, and completely different medications prescribed for other diseases that coincide with aging. These are precisely circumstances in which the patient is alone anyway! Common sense says that if chemicals are safe in low doses and edible, they are likely to be safe in higher doses unless they are unnatural or registered.

I'm a big believer in Bayesian statistics and therefore suspicious of FDA clinical trials on new chemicals with no history of use. Most drugs approved after 2000 are cancer suspects! I think a doctor or a vaccine solves a problem by creating more instances and thus best avoided unless really necessary and a healthy disrespect to new chemicals but not food.

With my thought, a particular burden was lifted after 2 months of self-assessment. I can now advise the family to try if you are as bothered with chronic illness as I am, as long as the risks are higher anyway. My work and registered risks have not collapsed until now. People who don't see death hanging there anyway, or a decrepit life, should expect the blessings of the FDA.

What is chemical aging?

The immense contribution is from Sinclar. Simple and useless except validation of de-aging methods. Every human cell has its DNA in a sac called a nucleolus. It specializes in the exact type of cell through an epigenetic covering of DNA by turning genes on and off using switches containing methyl groups. Some switches are permanently on or off depending on the expressed specialization. Others can be dynamically turned on or off depending on the protein being made.

Genetics and epigenetics make DNA an information-carrying molecule that can deliver some proteins through mRNA copying. Over time, methyl groups lose their elasticity, and a cell has more methyl groups that can no longer turn on and off. Methyls are part of the CpG islands, the C sugar being a phosphate bond with the next G sugar, a microscope can read the number of such methyl groups. The AI ​​can read the list to calculate the biological age of the cell! Validation stems from the age equality of cells in all parts of the human body and the predictable changes in all animals in Eutheria. Not only does evolution age all animals by the same method, but the different details of aging are also species-specific. No fraud can non-fraudulent claim this and escape scrutiny!

Improvement?

Let's break aging down into slow down and reset (getting younger). The slowdown also includes temporary restarts. This means that the subject's body lives longer after treatment. Reliable reset means getting younger repeatedly. Cross-over effects mean the interference of two treatments or one treatment and the interference of some drugs prescribed for some disease. The aging regimen is assumed to stop for the duration of other diseases, so the interference occurs initially for the aging half-life and then for the medicine half-life. It is safest to use only GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) chemicals. Since the repeated cycle of aging and resetting gives indefinite life, a reliable reset gives indefinite life.

FDA value

I think there is conservative safety in my recommendation. on. In my view, the best consequence of the law is that the FDA is reasonable in court, although I am more conservative because I am concerned about cross-drug interference and the 30-year-old is concerned about cancer risk. When required by the disease, I only allow doctors of modern medicine to prescribe drugs with history upon request.

My value?

I determine GRAS status assuming that the additional concentration of GRAS chemicals is generally, but not always, safe. I think there is conservative safety in my recommendations.

Safety: Since my GRAS status requires known fixed concentrations of drugs approved by the FDA before 1990, chemicals in fruits and vegetables, or chemical names already present in the body.

Effectiveness: I trust the American system with great academic confidence unless I'm wrong according me.

My added value: overcome smart choices, the composition of large random systems can produce immense interference, I compose large systems making sure that the chosen systems can be composed by identifying the best ones so that the resulting mixed system performs better than anyone else.

Details?

The number of supplements endorsed by aging increases every day. A stupid way is to try a random permutation subset of the supplements, hoping there will be no interaction, possibly even by an inexperienced doctor. This is done by many in India, who treat diseases and cures as if they were buying a product, usually with independent effects. I have contempt for these consumers and call them meta-assholes, not just once stupid but repeatedly. Two cures or drugs can be compounded only if the prescriber is a single registered physician or interactions are thought through accurately and the person performs a self-imposed clinical test, critical for fssai/2012 to know! Unfortunately, there is no credible data like that, side effect website indications are unreliable, and if written guarantees are sought, most doctors are smart enough to use legal language that can include all the known/unknown side effects so extensive that any rational patient will never try that drug or supplement! Between lawyers and doctors, the patient is screwed!

Writing rational aging recommendations is my mission and explains why I seek out a doctor/nurse on my team to argue effects as devil's advocate for my research. Beyond the three groups here (NAD+boost, Senescent forced autophagy by senolytics, and lack of reducing chemical AKG) and metformin even without TAME (4th) wait, I expect TRIIM-X to end up as 5, low dose rapamycin as 6, and much more like E5 not yet public. Why are spermidine and fisetin both, just 1, or the combination of quercetin? The most stupid idea is to compose the best of each or try them all sequentially, individually, like 5 Pandavas or 6 wives. There are difficult questions that even 99% of doctors will not know.

The three theories, determined by me to be independent, thus composable, are NMN-potentiated NAD+ and NO from resveratrol according to Dr. Sinclair (and not arginine but citrulline itself); Senolysis through fisetin according to Dr. de Grey; and CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitamins) according to Dr. Kennedy. The FDA essentially oversees the safety and efficacy of chemicals—healthy for drugs but useless for drugs and supplements aging like me—critical chemicals like new aging-related chemicals. Just for these, I make referrals differently, out of ethics, not law.

I'm a big believer in Bayesian statistics and therefore suspicious of FDA clinical trials on new chemicals with no history of use. Most drugs approved after 2000 are cancer suspects! I think a doctor or a vaccine solves a problem by creating more instances and thus best avoided unless really necessary and a healthy disrespect to new chemicals but not food.

With my thought, a particular load was lifted after 1 month of self-testing. I can now advise the family to try if you are as bothered with chronic illness as I am, as long as the risks are higher anyway. My work and registered risks have not collapsed until now. People who don't see death hanging there anyway, or a decrepit life, should expect the blessings of the FDA.

The whole field of Aging

1. Dr de Grey, for introducing/developing an engineering approach to the aging problem and senolytics

2. Dr. Sinclair, for NMN and 2019 theory of Aging

3. Dr. Yamanaka for inventing Yamanaka factors and iPSC.

4. Dr.Horvath for DNAm/GrimAge and Eutherian applicability of methylation

5. Drs. Conboys for initial heterochronic parabiosis and not young blood but plain albumin works

6. Dr. Fahi for TRIIM and TRIIM-X

The number of supplements endorsed by aging increases every day. A stupid way is to try a random permutation subset of the supplements, hoping there is no interaction. This is done by many in India, who treat diseases and cures as if they were buying a product, usually with independent effects. I have contempt for these consumers and call them meta-assholes, not just once stupid but repeatedly. Two cures or drugs can be compounded only if the prescriber is a single registered physician or interactions are thought through accurately and the person performs a self-imposed clinical test, critical for fssai/2012 to know! Unfortunately, there is no credible data like that, side effect website indications are unreliable, and if written guarantees are sought, most doctors are smart enough to use legal language that can include all the known/unknown side effects so extensive that any rational patient will never try that drug or supplement! Between lawyers and doctors, the patient is screwed!

Another stupidity is sequential tries of doctors until applicable one is found. It works enough to keep the method alive but cross effects are deadly. I believe in doctors above, i.e. efficacy of recommendations. But how to compose, even decide on who to compose, and what to do with normal illnesses. 

Best to let your doctor alone to figure out but with unheard-of chemicals! Your required doctor needs a specialist consultant, ie me!

Events in 2022

The most important to me, listed in Radom order, are

A. end of my clinical self-experiment

B. near the end of the partial self-experiment of the mother and sister

C. expected end of TRIIM-X and my start of HGH-1 with diabetes fix

D. end of MIB-626, thus better boost of NAD+ and NO.

E. Age test me. The success of the Sinclair aging test for mDNA and GrimAge

Exosome for Aging

 

Exosome (vesicle)

FunRich: An open-access standalone functional enrichment and interaction network analysis tool

Dr. Sinclair can make sense of this and send it to better-known targets. E5 works, based on believed Dr. Horvath. It seems to contradict parabiosis correction by Drs. Conboy. What goes?

Dr. Katcher has obligations to his funders without lying. I assume he did that by using young blood in E5. Youngblood is not needed and total confusion for all he wishes to not compete! But then why does E5 work? The answer is very obvious for the main past work of Dr. Katcher- finding the betterment of cancer! 

For success, he needs to know how metastasis happens ie through exosomes. Exosomes are hard to detect as very small. But why did Drs. Conboy fix elders without young blood? Aging comes in parts. The Conboy use of only albumin has limits and is probably not repeatable. Why does E5 work? Because it uses exosomes. Dr. Katcher knows them well as a biology teacher. These work between distant cells. All kinds of distant cells can be recruited to build the needed proteins. This is done by putting mRNA required for the resultant protein. These are put in exosomes along with source-id protein to penetrate the target. Distant cells present the mRNA to nucleolus bound DNA and make the protein. Note that some source protein in the exosome enables the entry of mRNA.

Generic proteins can be used in E5 for proteins desired. These can not be exotic for E5. E5 is for rats. Corresponding for humans is easy to select by a biology teacher.

Spanish acid

 por que tan importante

¿El secreto de la larga vida? Ácido hialurónico HA

El HLA oral alivia las arrugas en un estudio doble ciego controlado con placebo de 12 semanas

 

“Después de 8 semanas de ingestión, el grupo HLA mostró una disminución significativa de las arrugas en comparación con el grupo placebo. El brillo y la flexibilidad de la piel mejoraron significativamente después de 12 semanas en todos los grupos en comparación con la línea de base. Los resultados sugieren que el HLA oral inhibe las arrugas de la piel y mejora la condición de la piel”. (Fuente)

Las dosis orales de HLA de alto peso molecular migran a la piel

Reduce el dolor debido a la osteoartritis

 

Varios ensayos han demostrado que la ingesta oral de HLA mejora los síntomas de la osteoartritis. (Fuente)

Un ensayo aleatorizado, doble ciego y controlado con placebo realizado entre 2008 y 2015 ha demostrado la eficacia de HLA para el tratamiento de los síntomas asociados a la sinovitis y, en particular, el dolor de rodilla, el alivio del derrame o inflamación sinovial y la mejora de la musculatura de la rodilla. fuerza.

 Daunorrubicina modificada con ácido hialurónico más liposomas catiónicos de honokiol para el tratamiento del cáncer de mama junto con la eliminación de los canales miméticos vasculogénicos (2018)

https://sci-hub.se/10.1080/1061186X.2018.1428809

HYALURONIC ACID

Why so important

The Secret to Long Life? HA Hyaluronic Acid

Oral HLA Relieves Wrinkles in a Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled 12-Week Study

 

“After 8 weeks of ingestion, the HLA group showed significantly diminished wrinkles compared with the placebo group.  Skin luster and suppleness significantly improved after 12 weeks in all groups compared with the baseline.  The results suggest that oral HLA inhibits skin wrinkles and improves skin condition.” (Source)

Oral Doses of High Molecular Weight HLA Migrate to the Skin

Reduces Pain Due to Osteoarthritis

 

A number of trials have demonstrated that oral HLA intake improves symptoms of osteoarthritis.  (Source)

A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial carried out between 2008 and 2015 has proven the effectiveness of HLA for the treatment of symptoms associated with synovitis, and particularly, knee pain, relief of synovial effusion or inflammation, and improvement of muscular knee strength.

 Hyaluronic acid modified daunorubicin plus honokiol cationic liposomes for the treatment of breast cancer along with the elimination of vasculogenic mimicry channels(2018)

https://sci-hub.se/10.1080/1061186X.2018.1428809

LIPO HLA – Powdered Liposomal Hyaluronic Acid

$49.95*4=$200

self only

Spanish Rejuvenation

 

¿Por qué no es un fraude esta vez?

El método ha sido propuesto por varios científicos que no están familiarizados entre sí. Utiliza métodos de premios internacionales bien reconocidos. Todos están disponibles de forma transparente. Ni siquiera un científico se ha negado a mantener su método en secreto. Tal enfoque es el reverso del fraude. Todas las afirmaciones siempre se cotejan. Se ignoran las reclamaciones rápidas. Claramente, nadie está siendo obligado a declarar nada y/oa participar de mala gana. Todos son libres de declarar lo que sea y promover sus causas como sea. El único límite es el desconocimiento permanente de todo reclamo por parte de un imbécil.

¿Quién envejece y por qué?

Entre todas las intervenciones antienvejecimiento, las intervenciones dietéticas han mostrado el mayor potencial. La restricción calórica, sin desnutrir al individuo, retarda el proceso de envejecimiento y alarga la vida media y máxima en animales de diversa procedencia. Informes repetidos dicen que la restricción de la ingesta de alimentos en ratas extendió la vida media y máxima y disminuyó la aparición y la gravedad de las enfermedades crónicas. Los hallazgos posteriores enfatizaron que la restricción calórica tiene efectos sobre la vida útil en una amplia gama de organismos. Los efectos positivos de la restricción calórica en humanos también se han demostrado en muchos estudios. La restricción calórica mientras se mantiene una nutrición adecuada tiene efectos beneficiosos como la protección contra el desarrollo de obesidad, enfermedades cardiovasculares, hipertensión y cáncer. En un estudio controlado, la restricción calórica con altos niveles de actividad física mostró una disminución de la presión arterial, el peso corporal, los niveles de colesterol sérico, los niveles de insulina y otros parámetros antropométricos y fisiológicos. Los mecanismos por los cuales la restricción calórica induce propiedades que prolongan la vida no se comprenden completamente, pero se han sugerido las siguientes cuatro posibles vías objetivo: la activación de la proteína quinasa AMP (AMPK) y las sirtuinas, la inhibición del factor de crecimiento similar a la insulina-1 (IGF -1) señalización e inhibición de la diana de rapamicina en mamíferos (mTOR) por rapamicina. Estas vías son los principales mecanismos hipotéticos de acción de la restricción calórica que controlan el crecimiento celular, la función mitocondrial y la autofagia directa o indirectamente. Sin embargo, a pesar de los beneficios comprobados de la restricción calórica, es una técnica difícil de usar con éxito en humanos, ya que es un desafío aplicar el tratamiento a largo plazo, ya que requiere un alto nivel de determinación y autocontrol. Esta paradoja condujo al descubrimiento de compuestos que imitan el resultado de la restricción calórica en la salud y la esperanza de vida sin una restricción real en la ingesta calórica. Estos compuestos se denominaron "miméticos de restricción calórica" ​​(CRM).

Redactar recomendaciones de envejecimiento de manera racional es mi misión y explica por qué busco un médico/enfermero en mi equipo para argumentar sobre los efectos como abogado del diablo para mi investigación. Más allá de los tres aquí y metformina incluso sin TAME (4to), espero que TRIIM-X termine como 5, dosis baja de rapamicina como 6, mucho más como E5 aún no público. La idea más estúpida es componer lo mejor de cada uno, o probarlos todos secuencialmente, individualmente, como 5 Pandavas o seis esposas.

Las tres teorías, determinadas por mí como independientes, por lo tanto componibles, son NAD+ boost por NMN y NO de resveratrol según el Dr. Sinclair (y argnin por sí mismo); Senólisis a través de fisetina según el Dr. de Grey; y CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitaminas) según el Dr. Kennedy. La FDA esencialmente supervisa la seguridad y la eficacia de los productos químicos, saludables para los medicamentos pero inútiles para los medicamentos y me complementa: los productos químicos críticos como los nuevos productos químicos relacionados con el envejecimiento. Solo para estos, hago derivaciones de manera diferente, por ética, no por ley.

Mi principal mejora es eludir las preguntas sobre la biodisponibilidad y la administración de fármacos mediante el uso de formas de liposomas de todos los productos químicos (excepto NAD+ para la entrada BBB). Los liposomas eliminan los servicios médicos necesarios y funcionan incluso mejor que las inyecciones, ya que eluden la entrada a las células.

Se asume seguridad debido a la seguridad de baja concentración de

1 Elemento de muchas frutas y verduras sin peligros creíbles conocidos

2 Al menos 20-30 años de historia segura como medicamento o suplemento

3 estado GRAS en la ley de EE. UU.

4 Nombre químico de un compuesto corporal o intermedio

Por lo tanto, NMN se deriva del n. ° 4, Fisetin del n. ° 1, CaAKG del n. ° 4, argnin y resveratrol del n. ° 2. Esta es la seguridad personal y no la seguridad de la comunidad, única por la cual se pueden presentar dichos argumentos. Para las comunidades aleatorias, recomiendo esperar a la FDA, a menos que el riesgo de inacción sea mayor que el envejecimiento de la compensación. osición

La eficacia surge del hecho de que considero que estos tres desarrolladores son como ganadores dobles del premio Noble que defienden este hilo.

La eficacia conjunta ocurre a partir de la aparente independencia de los hilos, se necesitan aumentos de NAD+ y disminuyen empíricamente. El hilo de De Grey surge de la eliminación de las células senescentes dañinas que producen SASP y CD38 en particular, comprando inmunidad contra el cáncer como un beneficio secundario. El hilo AKG no está claro, puede funcionar debido a la contabilidad efectiva de las marcas de metilación, lo que prolonga la vida celular. La seguridad no termina aquí.

Hay peligros desconocidos por el tamaño de la dosis y las interacciones con otras partes de estos hilos, y medicamentos completamente diferentes recetados para otras enfermedades que coinciden con el envejecimiento. ¡Estas son precisamente circunstancias en las que el paciente está solo de todos modos! El sentido común dice que si los productos químicos son seguros en dosis bajas y comestibles, es probable que lo sean en dosis más altas, a menos que no sean naturales o estén registrados.

Creo firmemente en las estadísticas bayesianas y, por lo tanto, sospecho de las pruebas clínicas de la FDA sobre nuevos productos químicos sin antecedentes de uso. ¡La mayoría de los medicamentos aprobados después del 2000 son sospechosos de cáncer! Creo que un médico o una vacuna resuelve un problema al crear más instancias y, por lo tanto, es mejor evitarlo a menos que sea realmente necesario y una falta de respeto saludable a los nuevos productos químicos pero no a los alimentos.

Con mi pensamiento, se levantó una carga particular después de 2 meses de autoevaluación. Ahora puedo aconsejar a la familia que intente si está tan molesto con enfermedades crónicas como yo, siempre que los riesgos sean mayores de todos modos. Mi trabajo y los riesgos registrados no colapsaron hasta ahora. Las personas que no ven la muerte colgando allí de todos modos, o que no ven una vida decrepitud, deberían esperar las bendiciones de la FDA.

¿Qué es el envejecimiento químicamente?

El aporte inmenso es de Sinclar. Simple e inútil excepto la validación de los métodos de eliminación de envejecimiento. Cada célula humana tiene su ADN en un saco llamado nucléolo. Se especializa en el tipo exacto de célula mediante una cubierta epigenética del ADN mediante la activación y desactivación de genes que utilizan interruptores que contienen grupos metilo. Algunos interruptores están permanentemente encendidos o apagados según la especialización expresada. Otros pueden activarse o desactivarse dinámicamente según la proteína que se esté elaborando.

 La genética y la epigenética hacen del ADN una molécula portadora de información que puede entregar algunas proteínas a través de la copia del ARNm. Con el tiempo, los grupos metilo pierden su elasticidad y una célula tiene más grupos metilo que ya no pueden encenderse y apagarse. Los metilos son parte de las islas CpG, siendo el azúcar C, un enlace fosfato con el siguiente azúcar G, un microscopio puede leer el número de tales grupos metilo. ¡La IA puede leer la lista para calcular la edad biológica de la célula! La validación se deriva de la igualdad de edad de las células en todas las partes del cuerpo humano y los cambios predecibles en todos los animales en Eutheria. La evolución no solo envejece a todos los animales con el mismo método, sino que los diferentes detalles del envejecimiento también son específicos de la especie. ¡Ningún fraude puede afirmar esto de manera no fraudulenta y escapar al escrutinio!

¿Mejora?

Dividamos el envejecimiento en ralentizar y restablecer. La desaceleración también incluye reinicios temporales. Esto significa que el cuerpo del sujeto vive más tiempo después del tratamiento. Restablecer confiable significa volverse más joven repetidamente. Los efectos cruzados significan la interferencia de dos tratamientos o un tratamiento y la interferencia de algunos medicamentos recetados para alguna enfermedad. Se supone que el régimen de envejecimiento se detiene durante la duración de otras enfermedades, de modo que la interferencia ocurre inicialmente por la vida media del envejecimiento y luego por la vida media de la medicina. Lo más seguro es utilizar únicamente productos químicos GRAS (generalmente reconocidos como seguros). Dado que el ciclo repetido de envejecimiento y reinicio da una vida indefinida, un reinicio confiable produce una vida indefinida.

Valor FDA

Creo que hay seguridad conservadora en mi recomendación. Desde mi punto de vista, la mejor consecuencia de la ley es que la FDA es razonable ante los tribunales, aunque yo soy más conservador porque me preocupan las interferencias cruzadas de medicamentos y los 30 años de edad me preocupan por el riesgo de cáncer. Cuando lo requiere la enfermedad, solo permito que los médicos de medicina moderna receten medicamentos con historial a pedido.

¿Mi valor?

Determino el estado de GRAS asumiendo que la concentración adicional de sustancias químicas GRAS es generalmente, pero no siempre, segura. Creo que hay seguridad conservadora en mis recomendaciones.

Seguridad: dado que mi estado GRAS requiere concentraciones fijas conocidas de medicamentos aprobados por la FDA antes de 1990, productos químicos en frutas y verduras, o nombres químicos ya presentes en el cuerpo.

Efectividad: confío en el sistema estadounidense con gran confianza académica, a menos que esté equivocado según yo.

Mi valor agregado: supera las elecciones inteligentes, la composición de grandes sistemas aleatorios puede producir una interferencia inmensa, compongo grandes sistemas asegurándome de que los sistemas elegidos puedan componerse identificando los mejores para que el sistema mixto resultante funcione mejor que nadie.

¿Detalles?

El número de suplementos avalados por el envejecimiento aumenta cada día. Una forma estúpida es probar un subconjunto de permutación aleatoria del supcomplementos, con la esperanza de que no haya interacción, posiblemente incluso por parte de un médico sin experiencia. Eso lo hacen muchos en la India, que tratan las enfermedades y las curas como si compraran un producto, normalmente de efectos independientes. Siento desprecio por estos consumidores y los llamo meta-imbéciles, no solo una vez estúpidos sino repetidas veces. Se pueden componer dos curas o medicamentos solo si el prescriptor es un solo médico registrado o se piensa con precisión en las interacciones y la persona realiza una prueba clínica autoimpuesta, ¡crítica para que fssai/2012 lo sepa! Desafortunadamente, no hay datos creíbles como ese, las indicaciones de los sitios web de efectos secundarios no son confiables, y si se buscan garantías por escrito, la mayoría de los médicos son lo suficientemente inteligentes como para usar un lenguaje legal que puede incluir todos los efectos secundarios conocidos/desconocidos tan extensos que cualquier racional ¡El paciente nunca probará ese fármaco o suplemento! ¡Entre abogados y médicos, el paciente está jodido!

Redactar recomendaciones de envejecimiento de manera racional es mi misión y explica por qué busco un médico/enfermero en mi equipo para argumentar sobre los efectos como abogado del diablo para mi investigación. Más allá de los tres grupos aquí (NAD+boost, autofagia forzada Senescent por senolíticos y falta de AKG químico reductor) y metformina incluso sin TAME (4to) espere, espero que TRIIM-X termine como 5, dosis baja de rapamicina como 6, y mucho más como E5 aún no público. ¿Por qué la espermidina y la fisetina son ambas, solo 1, o la combinación de quercetina? La idea más estúpida es componer lo mejor de cada uno, o probarlos todos secuencialmente, individualmente, como 5 Pandavas o seis esposas. Hay preguntas difíciles que incluso el 99% de los médicos no sabrán.

Las tres teorías, determinadas por mí como independientes, por lo tanto componibles, son NAD+ potenciado por NMN y NO de resveratrol según el Dr. Sinclair (y no argnina sino citrulina por sí mismo); Senólisis a través de fisetina según el Dr. de Grey; y CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitaminas) según el Dr. Kennedy. La FDA esencialmente supervisa la seguridad y la eficacia de los productos químicos, saludables para los medicamentos pero inútiles para los medicamentos y suplementos que envejecen como yo: productos químicos críticos como nuevos productos químicos relacionados con el envejecimiento. Solo para estos, hago derivaciones de manera diferente, por ética, no por ley.

Mi principal mejora es eludir las preguntas sobre la biodisponibilidad y la administración de fármacos mediante el uso de formas de liposomas de todos los productos químicos (excepto NAD+ para la entrada de BBB) y, por lo tanto, uso de suplementos, excepto metformina. Los liposomas eliminan los servicios médicos necesarios y funcionan incluso mejor que las inyecciones, ya que eluden la entrada a las células. Funciona para muchos medicamentos antienvejecimiento que no tienen que guiarse por la región de inyección.

Se asume seguridad debido a la seguridad de baja concentración de

1 Elemento de muchas frutas y verduras sin peligros creíbles conocidos

2 Al menos 20-30 años de historia segura como medicamento o suplemento

3 estado GRAS en la ley de EE. UU.

4 Nombre químico de un compuesto corporal o intermedio

Por lo tanto, NMN se deriva del n. ° 4, Fisetin del n. ° 1, CaAKG del n. ° 4, argnin y resveratrol del n. ° 2. Esta es la seguridad personal y no la seguridad de la comunidad, única por la cual se pueden presentar dichos argumentos. Para comunidades aleatorias, recomiendo esperar a la FDA, a menos que el riesgo de inacción sea mayor que el envejecimiento de la composición.

La eficacia surge del hecho de que considero que estos tres desarrolladores son como ganadores dobles del premio Noble que defienden este hilo.

La eficacia conjunta ocurre a partir de la aparente independencia de los hilos, se necesitan aumentos de NAD+ y disminuyen empíricamente. El hilo de De Grey surge de la eliminación de las células senescentes dañinas que producen SASP y CD38 en particular, comprando inmunidad contra el cáncer como un beneficio secundario. El hilo AKG no está claro, puede funcionar debido a la contabilidad efectiva de las marcas de metilación, lo que prolonga la vida celular. La seguridad no termina aquí.

Hay peligros desconocidos por el tamaño de la dosis y las interacciones con otras partes de estos hilos, y medicamentos completamente diferentes recetados para otras enfermedades que coinciden con el envejecimiento. ¡Estas son precisamente circunstancias en las que el paciente está solo de todos modos! El sentido común dice que si los productos químicos son seguros en dosis bajas y comestibles, es probable que lo sean en dosis más altas, a menos que no sean naturales o estén registrados.

Creo firmemente en las estadísticas bayesianas y, por lo tanto, sospecho de las pruebas clínicas de la FDA sobre nuevos productos químicos sin antecedentes de uso. ¡La mayoría de los medicamentos aprobados después del 2000 son sospechosos de cáncer! Creo que un médico o una vacuna resuelve un problema al crear más instancias y, por lo tanto, es mejor evitarlo a menos que sea realmente necesario y una falta de respeto saludable a los nuevos productos químicos pero no a los alimentos.

Con mi pensamiento, se levantó una carga particular después de 1 mes de autocomprobación. Ahora puedo aconsejar a la familia que intente si está tan molesto con enfermedades crónicas como yo, siempre que los riesgos sean mayores de todos modos. Mi trabajo y los riesgos registrados no colapsaron hasta ahora. Las personas que no ven la muerte colgando allí de todos modos, o que no ven una vida decrepitud, deberían esperar las bendiciones de la FDA.

El número de suplementos avalados por el envejecimiento aumenta cada día. Una forma estúpida es probar un subconjunto de permutación aleatoria de los suplementos, con la esperanza de que no haya interacción. Eso lo hacen muchos en la India, que tratan las enfermedades y las curas como si compraran un producto, normalmente de efectos independientes. Tengo desprecio por estos consumidores.y llámalos meta-imbéciles, no solo una vez estúpidos sino repetidamente. Se pueden componer dos curas o medicamentos solo si el prescriptor es un solo médico registrado o se piensa con precisión en las interacciones y la persona realiza una prueba clínica autoimpuesta, ¡crítica para que fssai/2012 lo sepa! Desafortunadamente, no hay datos creíbles como ese, las indicaciones de los sitios web de efectos secundarios no son confiables, y si se buscan garantías por escrito, la mayoría de los médicos son lo suficientemente inteligentes como para usar un lenguaje legal que puede incluir todos los efectos secundarios conocidos/desconocidos tan extensos que cualquier racional ¡El paciente nunca probará ese fármaco o suplemento! ¡Entre abogados y médicos, el paciente está jodido!

Eventos en 2022

Los más importantes para mí, enumerados en orden de Radom, son

una. fin de mi autoexperimento clínico

B. cerca del final del autoexperimento parcial de la madre y la hermana

C. fin esperado de TRIIM-X y mi comienzo de HGH-1 con diabetes fix

D. final de MIB-626, por lo tanto, mejor impulso de NAD+ y NO.

mi. Éxito de la prueba de envejecimiento de Sinclair para DNAm y GrimAge

Rejuvenation

 The goal is not new - it is present in the oldest extant written telling of Gilgamesh travels in ancient Mesopotamia to cure old age, 4000 years earlier. Since then many frauds have risen. 

Why is it not a fraud this time?

The method has been proposed by several scientists not familiar with each other. It uses well-recognized international prize methods. All are available transparently. Not even 1 scientist has refused to hold his method a secret. Such an approach is the reverse of fraud. Every claim is always cross-checked. Speedy claims are ignored. Clearly, no one is being compelled to state anything, and /or unwillingly participate. Everyone is free to state whatever and advance their causes howsoever. The only limit is the permanent ignoration of every claim by a moron.

who ages and why?

Among all the anti-aging interventions, dietary interventions have shown the greatest potential. Calorie restriction, without malnourishing the individual, slows the aging process and expands the average and maximal lifespan in animals of diverse origins. Repeated reports say that restricting food intake in rats extended the median and maximum life span and decreased the onset and severity of chronic diseases. Subsequent findings emphasized that calorie restriction has effects on lifespan in a wide range of organisms. The positive effects of calorie restriction in humans have also been demonstrated in many studies. Calorie restriction while maintaining adequate nutrition has beneficial effects such as protecting against the development of obesity, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and cancer. In a controlled study, calorie restriction with high levels of physical activity showed a decrease in blood pressure, body weight, serum cholesterol levels, insulin levels, and other anthropometric and physiological parameters. The mechanisms by which calorie restriction induces life-extending properties are not fully understood, but the following four potential target pathways have been suggested: the activation of AMP protein kinase (AMPK) and sirtuins, inhibition of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) signaling, and inhibition of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) by rapamycin. These pathways are the main hypothesized mechanisms of action of calorie restriction that control cell growth, mitochondrial function, and autophagy directly or indirectly. However, despite the proven benefits of calorie restriction, it is a difficult technique to successfully use in humans as it is challenging to apply the treatment long-term since it requires a high level of determination and self-control. This paradox led to the discovery of compounds that imitate the outcome of calorie restriction on health and lifespan without an actual restriction in calorie intake. These compounds were named ‘calorie restriction mimetics’ (CRM).

Composing aging recommendations rationally is my mission and explains why I look for a doctor/Nurse in my team to argue on effects as a devil’s advocate to my research. Beyond the three here and metformin even without TAME (4th), I await TRIIM-X end as 5, low dose rapamycin as 6, lot more like E5 not public yet. The stupidest idea is composing best of each, or try them all sequentially, singly, like 5 Pandavas or six wives.

The three theories, determined by me to be independent, hence composable, are NAD+ boost by NMN and NO from resveratrol as per Dr. Sinclair (and argnin by self); Senolysis through fisetin as per Dr. de Grey; and CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitamins) as per Dr. Kennedy.  FDA essentially monitors the safety and efficacy of chemicals, salutary for drugs but useless for drugs and supplements me - critical chemicals like new all aging-related chemicals. For these alone, I do derivations differently, by ethics not law.

My principal improvement is to sidestep bio-availability and drug delivery questions by using liposome forms of all chemicals (except NAD+ for BBB entry). Liposomes eliminate needed medical services and do even better than injections as they sidestep cell entry.

Safety is assumed due to low concentration safety from

1    Element of many fruits and vegetables with no credible known dangers

2    At least 20-30 year safe history as a drug or supplement

3    GRAS status in US law

4    Chemical name for a body compound or intermediate

Thus NMN follows from #4, Fisetin from #1, CaAKG from #4, argnin, and resveratrol from #2. This is personal safety and not community safety, for which alone, such arguments can be advanced. For the random communities, I recommend waiting for FDA, unless the inaction risk is greater than aging composition.

Efficacy arises from the fact that I consider these three developers to be like double Noble prize winners who advocate this thread.

Joint efficacy happens from apparent independence of the threads, NAD+ boosts are needed and empirically decrease. The de Grey thread arises from eliminating harmful senescent cells producing SASP and CD38 in particular, buy cancer immunity as a side benefit. The AKG thread is unclear, may work due to effective bookkeeping of methylation marks, thus prolonging cell life. Safety does not end here. 

There are unknown dangers from dose size and interactions with other parts of these threads,  and wholly different drugs prescribed for other illnesses coincident with aging fixes. These are precisely circumstances when the patient is on their own anyway! Common sense says if the chemicals are safe in low doses and edible, they are likely so in higher doses, unless not natural or so recorded.

I strongly believe in Bayesian statistics and hence am suspicious of FDA clinical tests on new chemicals without a history of use. Most drugs approved post-2000 are cancer suspects! I believe a doctor or a vaccine solves a problem by instantiating more and hence is better avoided unless really needed and healthy disrespect to new chemicals but not foods.

With my thinking, a particular load was lifted after 2 months of self-test. Now I can advise the family to try if as upset with chronic diseases as me provided the risks are more anyway. My work and risks recorded did not crash so far. People who see no death hanging there anyway, or not a decrepitude life should await FDA blessings.

What is aging chemically?

The immense contribution is of Sinclar. Simple and useless except validation of de-aging methods. Each human cell has its DNA in a sack called the nucleolus. It is specialized to the exact kind of cell by an epigenetic covering of the DNA by on and off of genes using methyl group bearing switches. Some switches are permanently on or off according to the specialization expressed. Others can be dynamically on or off according to the protein being made.

 Genetics and epigenetics make the DNA an information-bearing molecule that can deliver some proteins through copy by mRNA. With time, the methyl groups lose their elasticity and a cell has more methyl groups no longer capable of on-off.  The methyls are part of CpG islands, being sugar C, phosphate bond to next G sugar, a microscope can read the number of such methyl groups. The list can be read by AI to compute a biological age for the cell! Validation follows from equal age of cells in all parts of the human body and predictable changes in all animals in Eutheria. Not only does evolution age all animals by the same method, but different aging details are also species-specific. No fraud can state this in a non-fraudulent way and escape scrutiny!

Amelioration?

Let us divide de-aging in to slow down and reset. Slow down includes temporary resets as well. This means that the body of the subject lives longer after treatment. Reliable reset means becoming younger repeatedly. Cross-effects mean interference of two treatments or one treatment and interference of some medications prescribed for some illness. It is assumed that the aging regime is halted for the duration of other illnesses so that interference happens initially by aging half-life and later by medicine half-life. The safest is to only use GRAS (generally recognized as safe) chemicals. Since repeated aging and reset cycle gives indefinite life, a reliable reset yields indefinite life.

FDA value

I believe that there is conservative safety in my recommendation. From my thinking, the best consequence of the law is that the FDA is Court-reasonable even though I am further conservative in that I worry about cross-interference of drugs and 30 years of age to worry of cancer risk. When required by illness, I only allow modern medicine doctors prescribing drugs with history by request Aging is different on that FDA-wait is stupid and other metrics must be used for safety and effectiveness.

My value?

I determine the GRAS status by assuming that extra concentration of GRAS chemicals is generally, but not always, safe. I believe that there is conservative safety in my recommendations.

Safety: Given that my GRAS status requires known fixed concentrations of drugs FDA-approved before 1990, chemicals in fruits and vegetables, or chemical names already present in body.

Effectiveness: I trust the American system to great academic trust unless wrong as per me.

My value adds: exceeds clever choices, the composition of random great systems can produce immense interference, I compose great systems by ensuring that the chosen systems can be composed by pinpointing the best so that the resultant mixed system is likely to work better than anyone.

Details?

The number of vouched for aging supplements increases every day. One stupid way is to try a random permutation subset of the supplements, hoping for no interaction, possibly even by inexperienced doctor. That is done by many in India, who treat illnesses and cures as buying a product, typically independent in effects. I have contempt for these consumers and call them meta-morons, not only once stupid but repeatedly so. Two cures or medicines can be composed only if the prescriber is a single registered doctor or interactions are precisely thought about and the person runs a self-imposed clinical test, critical for fssai/2012 to know! There is, unfortunately, no credible data like that, side effect web sites indications are not reliable, and if written assurances are sought, most doctors are smart enough to use lawyer language that can include every known/unknown side effect so extensive that any rational patient will never try that drug or supplement! Between lawyers and doctors, the patient is fucked! 

Composing aging recommendations rationally is my mission and explains why I look for a doctor/Nurse in my team to argue on effects as a devil’s advocate to my research. Beyond the three groups here (NAD+boost, Senescent forced autophagy by senolytics, and missing reducing chemical AKG) and metformin even without TAME (4th) wait, I await TRIIM-X end as 5, low dose rapamycin as 6, and a lot more like E5 not public yet. Why is spermidine and fisetin both, just 1, or quercetin combo? The stupidest idea is composing best of each, or try them all sequentially, singly, like 5 Pandavas or six wives. There are hard questions even 99% of doctors will not know.

The three theories, determined by me to be independent, hence composable, are NAD+ boost by NMN and NO from resveratrol as per Dr. Sinclair (and not argnin but citrulline by self); Senolysis through fisetin as per Dr. de Grey; and CaAKG (+ayurveda +vitamins) as per Dr. Kennedy.  FDA essentially monitors the safety and efficacy of chemicals, salutary for drugs but useless for aging drugs and supplements like me - critical chemicals like new all aging-related chemicals. For these alone, I do derivations differently, by ethics not law.

My principal improvement is to sidestep bio-availability and drug delivery questions by using liposome forms of all chemicals (except NAD+ for BBB entry) thus using supplements except metformin. Liposomes eliminate needed medical services and do even better than injections as they sidestep cell entry. Works for many aging drugs that do not have to be guided by the injection region.

Safety is assumed due to low concentration safety from

1    Element of many fruits and vegetables with no credible known dangers

2    At least 20-30 year safe history as a drug or supplement

3    GRAS status in US law

4    Chemical name for a body compound or intermediate

Thus NMN follows from #4, Fisetin from #1, CaAKG from #4, argnin, and resveratrol from #2. This is personal safety and not community safety, for which alone, such arguments can be advanced. For random communities, I recommend waiting for FDA, unless inaction risk is greater than aging composition.

Efficacy arises from the fact that I consider these three developers to be like double Noble prize winners who advocate this thread.

Joint efficacy happens from apparent independence of the threads, NAD+ boosts are needed and empirically decrease. The de Grey thread arises from eliminating harmful senescent cells producing SASP and CD38 in particular, buy cancer immunity as a side benefit. The AKG thread is unclear, may work due to effective bookkeeping of methylation marks, thus prolonging cell life. Safety does not end here. 

There are unknown dangers from dose size and interactions with other parts of these threads,  and wholly different drugs prescribed for other illnesses coincident with aging fixes. These are precisely circumstances when the patient is on their own anyway! Common sense says if the chemicals are safe in low doses and edible, they are likely so in higher doses, unless not natural or so recorded.

I strongly believe in Bayesian statistics and hence am suspicious of FDA clinical tests on new chemicals without a history of use. Most drugs approved post-2000 are cancer suspects! I believe a doctor or a vaccine solves a problem by instantiating more and hence is better avoided unless really needed and healthy disrespect to new chemicals but not foods.

With my thinking, a particular load was lifted after 1 month of self-test. Now I can advise the family to try if as upset with chronic diseases as me provided the risks are more anyway. My work and risks recorded did not crash so far. People who see no death hanging there anyway, or not a decrepitude life should await FDA blessings.

The number of vouched for aging supplements increases every day. One stupid way is to try a random permutation subset of the supplements, hoping for no interaction. That is done by many in India, who treat illnesses and cures as buying a product, typically independent in effects. I have contempt for these consumers and call them meta-morons, not only once stupid but repeatedly so. Two cures or medicines can be composed only if the prescriber is a single registered doctor or interactions are precisely thought about and the person runs a self-imposed clinical test, critical for fssai/2012 to know! There is, unfortunately, no credible data like that, side effect web sites indications are not reliable, and if written assurances are sought, most doctors are smart enough to use lawyer language that can include every known/unknown side effect so extensive that any rational patient will never try that drug or supplement! Between lawyers and doctors, the patient is fucked! 

Events in 2022

Most important to me, listed in Radom order, are

a.    end of my clinical self-experiment in november

b.   near end of partial self-experiment by mother and sister

c.    expected end of TRIIM-X and my start of HGH-1 with diabetes fix

d.    end of MIB-626, hence better NAD+ boost and NO.

e.    Success of Sinclair aging test for DNAm and GrimAge of self