Must read warning

 

Disclaimer

Minimum is consult a doctor

MY logic depends on necessary and sufficient, generally but not always.

I'm not a doctor, medical professional, or trained therapist. I'm a researcher and pragmatic biohacking practitioner exercising free speech to share evidence as I find it. Furthermore, I make no claims. Please practice skepticism and rational critical thinking. You should consult a medicine professional about any serious decisions that you might make about your health. Not fully reading once and not interning can hurt you seriously, even death.

 Your own rational thinking is required only when there is disagreement in professionals or if the professionals state that there is no known method for achieving what is sought or its costs are not achievable etc. Opinions and consultation include research papers from credible journals, or acceptance by government agencies like FDA (Federal U.S. Food and Drug Administration). There are requirements of safety (critical, also certifiable by government GRAS (Generally Recognized as safe)) and efficacy. Both are sufficient but not always necessary.

MEDICINAL VACCINES: 4th actionable mehod

 

The latest link                prior                next

I'm not a doctor, medical professional, or trained therapist. I'm a researcher and pragmatic biohacking practitioner exercising free speech to share evidence as I find it. I make no claims. Please practice skepticism and rational critical thinking. You should consult a professional about any serious decisions that you might make about your health.

I was astonished to so rapid a return on my previous notice, interesting for science reasons only, crystal clear understanding of this! I claimed that cancer and aging are closely related. The First problem in cancer is marking the evil cells. Once marked, somehow killing can be developed. But the cancer cells (also aging) will ignore all apoptosis signals! Fortunately, both cancers and aging take time. While the infected cells ignore apoptosis signals, they in the vast majority of cases do express proteins. These all escape detection by bodies immune cells (T and V), as clear from cancer occurrence! Can happen to anyone, better chances as more age of patient

Normally, cells escaping apoptosis are not detected as foreign invaders and hunted down by immune cells. Sometimes identification takes time, happens and the patient recovers. Best a patient can do is keep cheerful as this cure is probabilistic and odds are against. What if some way could be found to train the immune cells to recognize the cancer apoptosis evaders as foreign, based on the expressed proteins? Likely, healthy cells do not express cancer proteins. Still have to think of how to apply to aging cells!

One way has been done is by planting an aspirin sized body near a lymph node, treatment now tested.

Medicinal vaccination i.e. vaccination cure after the cancer

So this is method 4 to explore! Just a thought for cancer cells and aging cells are likely different here.

What is involved in strengthening thymus? Drugs, supplements, plants?

How will I know if some Indian doctor will do Dana Farber fix, when, cost!

Can I request updates and other information?

This reference will provide a good review of my investigation.

How excited I am on reading that if you had the thymus of a 12-year-old, you would live a thousand years! Thymus declines thereafter and has increasing levels of fat. Every opportunistic disease gets the old, with declining white cells from thymus. Not many doctors know immunotherapy! That is why this vital subject escaped me so far!

Yamanaka factor research start

 

The latest link            prior            next

I'm not a doctor, medical professional, or trained therapist. I'm a researcher and pragmatic biohacking practitioner exercising free speech to share evidence as I find it. I make no claims. Please practice skepticism and rational critical thinking. You should consult a professional about any serious decisions that you might make about your health.

I have actionable supplement methods and TPE based methods with some minor risk. I now turn to Non-actionable methods having exhausted the actionable category. All references next are part of scientific knowledge and must be cleared and suggested by a doctor! The entire third line is based on Yamanaka factors and pulsed use of a subset in living animals. After the research is done, it will be first tested against cancer patients. There is NO reasonable way to handle them in modern medicine, patients are there who will likely benefit, As a scientist, I can say with enormous experience that cancer fix and aging fix go together. Impossible to separate the progress, and hence a population benefiting from the risk. With other methods, I choose knowingly, to benefit aging diseases.

Science, based on very long experience (20 years), is the first in claim of aging versus cancers. This is based on two central experimental (hence scientific) results, one that OSKM factors reprogram any cell to its pluripotent state (magic that purged religious morons out of science, magic as scientists were expecting very complex processing by female cell in fertilization!) and finding that low pulsed ingesting of OSK was tolerated quite well by life. Just cutting out  of M was enough to destroy reversion which meant cancers. These were joined by Horvath work that related methylation at Cp sites to calendar age and death. These convert aging into a science because all procedures can be tested and compared. Every religious and social moron claims to benefit humanity's age benefits provided their methods are followed. There is no distinction between these idiots and my certainty of it will snow in Simla, same day, year 2999; or a loan to me to repay on any dates 2999 to be repaid then (Complicated versions drive income tax officials very angry)!

 Claim I make is that cancer and aging are related. Prior to cancer metastization, a cancer is like local senescence of a cell that ignores all apoptosis signals. It becomes persistent life waste that occupies valuable space and causes senescence-like in neighbors. Exactly what aging does, except that aging does not affect neighbors! There is no way to select intelligently. Surgical removal is not possible as you have to get all, impossible with chaotic growth! Chemotherapy targets a lot of good cells. I have scientific hope that vaccine make RNA methods will allow targeted selection.

My science tells me that medical people will sow up this genetic engineering and drive its price to unreasonable levels. It applies to Cancers and medical intervention makes sense. It applies to aging, and I am dead against Doctors because of other methods. My political belief is that the developed world will try to restrict competition and some, like India and Mexico, will not the blackmailed. However, on defeat, the task of beneficial control will have to allow illegal/quantum tunneling!

Closure for a while

 

Disclaimer        The latest link            prior        next

Subject is aging. The Best review found is this. USA government says this. Today is my last essay on BNBE or Beneficial Neutral Plasma Exchange (my new phrase) FOR DILUTING BLOOD AND MORE, for a while. This is because I am committed to BNBE on self but open to medical advice. By my own count, I will be ready middle of May. That gives me enough time.

Why need time?

1. I got the first dose of corona vaccine today. (March 8). Second dose is April 6 or later. After second dose, immunity reaches plateau after 30 days. That is May 6. No need to dawdle then. So May, second week on, depending on TPE availability. Pointless in detail-think about benefits now. The worst case is some pain and failed TPE in its mission. Average expectation is benefit to heart, diabetes and age. In any case, self-imposed isolation ends the second week of may, actually April 30 when may attend a marriage.

2. Three months to set up BNBE, data collection, doctor advice including the cancellation of this project. Note that I am not seeking life extension but improvement in my aging diseases and strongly believe that work in this direction will be done in the USA and available in 3 years. Till then, Yamanaka factor supplements may hit the market. So delay may be useful.

What if average success?

Reopen two fascinating projects for mushroom farming in orchards of UP and high orchard cover with sun-sensitive optical electric panels feeding to State Grid. Both represent paradigm shift, are doable (after repeated experimentation) and represent two of many ideas for doubling income from orchards I own. India will love electricity from non-stealable heights and additional produce to meet growing population with fixed land sizes.

Useful update

Pterostilbene has the remarkable property of being a general broad spectrum antibacterial/bug in some plants over resveratrol!

 

Chemistry of Aging

 

Disclaimer            The latest link                        prior                   after

Contrary to expectation, all life shares the SAME kind of DNA, and have similar, if applicable, modes of aging. There is no need, hence anti-religion, for this to be so. BUT it is so, and lot of research in genetics can be done on models that apply. In fact, non-applicability itself is useful information, subject of research as to why!

Aging is a genetic process, outside medicine, or later a specialty. I am a strong believer and professor! Most current doctors, including currently being trained, know nothing about the chemicals and procedures, except perform them on request, ignorant of why! They are as ignorant as most re stem cells.

I am not interested in learning the biology or chemistry outside its application in aging reversal. To carve out the niche, currently I admit only 3 kinds of method categories, soft methods, Plasma based methods, and medical methods based on Yamanaka factors. Third are most exciting but require FDA equivalent and medicine management. The entire third method is considered outside my current competence. Soft methods are based on parroting successful heroes like Dr. Sinclair. That is the ultimate reason for accept and denial. Plasma based methods are all blood plasma based. Blood is drawn, Preserves are removed, rest of plasma is modified, Preserves are restored and blood restored.

Modifications to Plasma is chemical engineering entrepreneurial, not medicine subject; insist I, including a required court visit. It is not a bureaucratic subject either, beyond open safety rules.

DNA, for later research reasons have 3 genes in human, AMPK, SIRTUIN, and mTOR progenitors. This is the ABC of aging! Genes do not matter, but enzymes do, named as genes. An enzyme protein is needed as catalyst that organic reactions happen in human time scales. It makes sense, without them in reactions, all kind of combination will occur at random and life will not exist. Too slow and then life will not exist as complicated molecules would not form and be useful. By doing the reaction with enzymes gives you the best of worlds, reactions at modifiable speeds, enzymes not routinely found. By genes, you allow them to be transmitted in generations, between generations, despite randomness. It is not complete, there are errors, lots of failed individuals. As long as there is some randomness, evolution happens, speed-ed up to managed speeds by sexual reproduction, randomness happening due to genetic diseases from genetically close unions. I will not have that problem!

I think complex arguments like evolution are justified only for hypothesis formation. Testing is absolutely needed, performed in open, but entrepreneurial nature, not science, drives the chemicals tested (like FDA on supplements). Whether a properly tested product is admitted or conditions imposed will not be considered.

SIRTUIN is nearly universal between all species (all life kingdoms), For humans, there are 8. Their activity includes histone deacetylase, desuccinylase, demalonylase, demyristoylase and depalmitoylase activity. From in vitro studies, sirtuins are implicated in influencing cellular processes like aging, transcription, apoptosis, inflammation[6] and stress resistance, as well as energy efficiency and alertness during low-calorie situations.[7] As of 2018, there was no clinical evidence that sirtuins affect human aging, but I suspect clinical trials of NMN are after this, as is Sirtuin role.

AMPK 5' AMP-activated protein kinase or AMPK or 5' adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase is an enzyme (EC 2.7.11.31) that plays a role in cellular energy homeostasis, largely to activate glucose and fatty acid uptake and oxidation when cellular energy is low.

The mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR),[5] previously referred to as the mammalian target of rapamycin, and sometimes called FK506-binding protein 12-rapamycin-associated protein 1 (FRAP1), is a kinase that in humans is encoded by the MTOR gene.[6][7][8] mTOR is a member of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related kinase family of protein kinases.[9]

mTOR links with other proteins and serves as a core component of two distinct protein complexes, mTOR complex 1 and mTOR complex 2, which regulate different cellular processes.[10] In particular, as a core component of both complexes, mTOR functions as a serine/threonine protein kinase that regulates cell growth, cell proliferation, cell motility, cell survival, protein synthesis, autophagy, and transcription.[10][11] As a core component of mTORC2, mTOR also functions as a tyrosine protein kinase that promotes the activation of insulin receptors and insulin-like growth factor 1 receptors.[12] mTORC2 has also been implicated in the control and maintenance of the actin cytoskeleton

In terms of copying Dr. Sinclair

NMN affects mitochondria positively. He uses 1gm/day. By experience, Betaine add is absolutely needed(link for NR, applies to all B3 forms like NMN) to replace methyl that NMN uses up.

 Pterostilbene is better resveratrol (more bioavailable). He takes 1gm, equal to 250 mg (I say).  Its chemical relative, resveratrol, received FDA GRAS status in 2007,^[9] and approval of synthetic resveratrol as a safe compound by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2016.^[10] Pterostilbene differs from resveratrol by exhibiting increased bioavailability (80% compared to 20% in resveratrol) due to the presence of two methoxy groups which cause it to exhibit increased lipophilic and oral absorption.

Have taken NMN sublingual. Some Positive effects. Now change in NMN and will take in IV. The dosage is likely wrong. Based on LIFESPAN.IO, do it weekly (dosage combined and reduced) rather than NAD+ daily. Need pharmaceutical NMN for that.

Remember my goal - age solution to age diseases (heart problems, essential tremors, diabetes and aging). All can be measured after procedure. Full blood count before and after the procedure. If it fails on me, or is partial, then even that is a research point and science puzzle.

FAQ Aging theories

 

The latest link                after        before

The unavoidable question this raises is why are you spending untold amounts on a project that flies in the face of the basic fact of the human condition, the existential certainty of aging and death. To which the unavoidable answer is another question: Who the hell else is going to do it? Google. Can it be done with probabilistic efficacy? Yes. Are others doing it? Yes. Do you get anything for self-risk? Yes. Will you succeed if a failure? Yes. TPE will likely boost some things. Does Aging theory matter? NO! No attempt by me to build on things not derived for empiricist me.

Since I offer self as guinea-pig, safety is not the only concern. Clearly I am expecting something in the efficacy spectrum to benefit me, as I have detailed earlier. An important issue is likelihood of favorable outcome and marginal outcomes that will collectively benefit me even if the main goal is not met. Theory of Information is a new Paradigm says senolysis is similar to garbage-collection that I happen to relate to, despite what practitioners know this, will not be into aging. That is a new paradigm for senolytic drugs, selecting the goals of GC and their cleanup. There seems to be no need to recycle and reuse senescent cells, given that NBE proteins that are eliminated, are all back to their pre-NBE VALUES IN 48 HOURS (AMBAR). Multiple AMBAR procedures with week gap are fine.

I admit to being a novice in basic bio step but not in macro ideas.

Start

Programmed vs. Non-Programmed Aging Theory Controversy

 

What are the main scientific theories of aging? 

Aging theories fall into four main categories, programmed and non-programmed, entropy based and sudden death.

Sudden death is a quantum physics concept. Here it means telomere shortening to limit.

Entropy based theories are those that assume the growing chaos eventually has no external sink.

A programmed theory of biological aging also known as adaptive aging, active aging, or aging-by-design proposes that organisms are designed to age and have a limited life span and that aging is purposely caused or allowed by a genetic program similar to the one that controls the development and growth of an organism. According to this concept, aging is an adaptation in that it is an organism design feature that was selected by the evolution process because it benefited the organism. Because a limited life span conveys benefit, organisms can possess potentially complex evolved systems that actively regulate life span.

 

Non-programmed, also known as non-adaptive or passive aging theories contend that aging is the passive result of an organism's inability to better withstand deteriorative processes and that aging has no evolutionary purpose or benefit. Aging is a defect not a feature of an organism's design. Some non-adaptive aging theories contend that aging is an adverse side effect of some beneficial function such as reproduction or cancer prevention that aids the organism in early life at the expense of aging in later life.

 

Isn’t aging known to result from generic deteriorative processes such as oxidation, wear, or other accumulated molecular damage? 

Processes similar to those that cause gradual deterioration in machinery or exterior paint also operate in living organisms. However, it is known that living organisms possess many maintenance and repair functions that act to counteract deterioration. In addition, generic deteriorative processes cannot be the entire explanation for aging because very similar species, possessing very similar biochemistry (with presumably similar exposure to deterioration), have very different life spans. According to one programmed aging concept, the aging mechanism purposely discontinues or slows the maintenance and repair functions at a species-specific age to result in the observed species-specific life spans.

 

Isn’t programmed aging incompatible with Darwin’s theory of evolution?  Doesn’t evolution favor development of characteristics that benefit an organism’s ability to live longer and breed more? 

Yes, programmed aging is incompatible with traditional evolutionary mechanics and requires an evolutionary mechanics theory that allows for a slightly expanded definition of “benefit.”  However, a number of other observed organism characteristics also appear to conflict with classical theory. This led to development of four different types of proposed adjustments to classical evolutionary mechanics theory since 1962. These alternative theories support programmed aging. The alternatives are: group selection theories, kin selection theories, evolvability theories, and gene-centered evolutionary mechanics theories. Note that there is no scientific disagreement with the idea that evolution has occurred and that current species are descended from different earlier species. The scientific disagreement centers around details of how evolution works, the evolutionary mechanisms and processes.

 

What possible “benefit” could a purposely limited life span produce? 

Different theorists following the programmed aging concept have developed theories proposing many benefits in the following broad categories: First, that a purposely limited life span increases the chance for group survival (e.g. kin, herd, larger population, even species) and thereby reduces the chance of extinction. Second, that a limited life span enhances the ability of a species or population to evolve or adapt or allows it to adapt more rapidly to changes in its environment producing a competitive advantage. Aging or other design-imposed life span limitation is obviously adverse from the viewpoint of an individual organism. Theorists generally agree that an organism’s evolutionary need for additional life span declines following the age at which it is first capable of reproduction.

 

How do programmed aging theories compare to non-programmed theories of aging? 

Non-programmed (non-adaptive) theories (mostly developed prior to 1962) fit with classical evolutionary mechanics while programmed (adaptive) theories provide a better fit with observational evidence but require one of the newer alternative evolutionary mechanics theories. Recent observations such as “aging genes” have added to supporting empirical evidence and resulted in increased interest in programmed theories. The choice of non-programmed vs. programmed aging theory is consequently essentially a choice between believing traditional evolutionary mechanics theory against observational evidence or believing observational evidence against traditional mechanics but with the support of the newer alternative mechanics theories. There are multiple programmed aging theories that differ in detail and there are also multiple competing non-programmed theories.

 

Is programmed aging biological suicide?

 Programmed aging could be considered a form of biological suicide. However, some animals and plants die suddenly following reproduction rather than from gradual deterioration and represent more explicit instances of biological suicide. Examples include octopus, salmon, and even some mammals, the male marsupial mice. Such instances of acutely self-limited life span would also fit programmed aging theories that propose that a species-specific limited life span generally conveys benefit. Some programmed aging theorists contend that gradual aging conveys additional evolutionary benefit relative to sudden death.

 

What is the history and status of the programmed vs. non-programmed aging argument? 

At some level this controversy has existed for the 150 years since Darwin’s evolutionary mechanics theory was published in 1859. Prior to Darwin, there was no reason to suspect that life span was a characteristic whose origin differed from that of other characteristics that varied widely between species. The conflict between the survival-of-the-fittest concept and life span observations was immediately noticed following publication of Darwin's book On the Origin of Species.

 

The first formal programmed aging theory was a “programmed death” theory published in 1882 by German biologist August Weissmann. Additional formal programmed aging theories based on group selection and evolvability appeared following publication of those alternative evolutionary mechanics theories in 1962 and 1995.

 

Recently, the trend has been toward increasing scientific evidence (such as aging genes) supporting programmed aging. Concurrently, scientific confidence in traditional evolutionary mechanics has declined. However, most gerontologists and other medical researchers still believe in non-programmed (non-adaptive) aging.

 

Why should we care? 

About 75 percent of all deaths in the U.S. and other developed countries now result from age-related conditions such as cancer, heart disease, and stroke. In effect, aging is the most important cause of these diseases. Understanding the aging process is therefore essential to understanding, preventing, and treating the age-related diseases. Although highly associated with aging, these diseases kill or injure many relatively young people and are the target of much or even most medical and pharmaceutical research. Programmed aging theories suggest different and additional approaches in prevention and treatment of age-related conditions relative to non-programmed theories.

End

Programmed vs. Non-Programmed Aging Theory Controversy

 

Complete non-argumentative rejuvenation theory

 

The latest link        after          before

Unlike my writings so far dominated by arguments, this is no directed at a skeptic as me, but towards the vast majority of people who want a definitive theory which might be challenged, in which case the one with better reputation is picked! Greatly but subliminal manipulated by very intelligent but all evil advertisement professionals funding all knowledge inputs. Only extreme vigilance van defeat them and there is a crying need for Consumer reports funded by low taxation on sales, given proportionally by representatives selected, at center, states and districts and tied to politics for controversy and broad way of public funding. Local supreme court may be made toothless by prohibit of public funds to anyone using private funding and by commerce illegality argument of poisoning product advertisement or by constitutional amendment in extreme legal cases.

Assumption is Sinclair Theory of information on aging is essentially correct. The fact that nature has not found any other solution to DNA break as per billion years only indicates the loveliness of the solution. First DNA can be far older since life-origin might be brought in by a rock from solar system, or a supernova explosion or might even be outside our enclosing black hole reflecting the only portal between black holes possible sent by an entropy dying civilization. But then why bother with this great research of later.

All that the theory of information says is that DNA is digital equivalent of enclosing analog epigenome, methyl groups are added and subtracted for turning genes off and on; after long time (relative to DNA processes) the methylation process fails making the cell senescent which dies to either a quiet cell or ignore apoptosis signal zombie. There is no natural way to kill these cells, a great improvement will be new senolysis drugs that will target cancers and aging causing zombie, caused by these senescent cells. Periodic cleaning is needed.

Not much is known about senolysis drugs and their cleanup. They may be specific to a particular mesenchymal or other specialized zombie. Or it may be capable of clearing many kinds of zombies. The specialization for a specific kind of organ cell may not be needed. The senolytic drug may be effective on many cancers. It might even be a generic antagonist to zombies in general, and then be a true age drug. Aging drugs are not needed to garbage-collect all zombie, as long as a significant number of zombies are reduced.

As a strange computer scientist, I am amazed at how similar this process is to garbage-collection. I know a little more, since the MIT expert who invented copying garbage-collection professor-ed in Rochester and was my faculty advisor. Just to be in good books, I learned garbage-collection and even Google 3 mark algorithm in Golang of Google and why it has taken over even Python!

In computer terms, initially the body is clean of methyl (have a lot of free storage). To adult-hood, storage is allocated and then program runs (life). As time goes by, the free storage is exhausted. Eventually, garbage collection is needed. There are many zombies intermixed with good records. A mark-sweep garbage collection is done. We know good cells (records) are those that are reachable from top registers. Here, the bad cells are those that that became zombie, like one form of PC where free cells are so marked on deletion. Biology is simple in that there is no long chain to GC, just marking on deletion is enough, Senolytic drugs kill all cells that ignore certain kind of apoptosis signals! They must not harm normal cells. If they kill many kinds of zombies then great. The only thing is NMN. Experimentally, it strengthens good guys by NAD+, boosting mitochondria. Same effects by NR or Mitoq. They may or may not strengthen a zombie. They certainly do not increase or decrease zombie populati0on, but lengthen becoming zombie, that is reducing cell age!