6 ms·

I always think of these two monkeys[i] when I consider slowing down my age. [i] http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/08/calor

I always think of these two monkeys[i] when I consider slowing down my age. [i] http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/08/calorie_restriction_and_longevity_monkey_study_shows_hunger_doesn_t_increase_longevity_but_type_of_food_does_.html http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_exa...

baxtr 9y ago
This is really great! Thanks for the link. I think you should post it to HN
musha68k 9y ago
Thanks for sharing – always those poor monkeys though... An even stronger data point to me would be the actual people of Okinawa who are (were?) among the healthiest and oldest in the world. In addition to having a high quality diet and a rich social life in general, they are practicing “hara hachi bu” – the confucian tradition of always eating only until “about 80% full”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hara_hachi_bun_me https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hara_hachi_bun_me
mysterypie 9y ago
It's an interesting well-written article, but you realize that their main point was that it contradicts the earlier calorie-restriction study: "The Nature authors found no increase in lifespan; the calorically restricted animals lived no longer, statistically, than their well-fed cousins." They try to reconcile the studies: maybe it's the natural-ingredient foods vs the refined foods, maybe it's the generous diet vs the more-than-generous free-feeding, or conceding that the monkey's don't live longer, but they live healthier. IMO, the best paragraph from the article was this: "Many of us simply roll our eyes and click away when yet another medical study contradicts the last study—so what else is new? Coffee’s bad for you, until it’s good for you—and so is red wine. Antioxidants are essential, or they’re useless. And so on." Other than some very basic common sense things -- like don't eat rat poison -- I never find that these kinds of studies lead to correct and actionable information about how to slow down aging or how to lead your life. And it's extremely frustrating to even try.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- njarboe 9y ago
  I think that individual genetics and behaviors are very important for these kind of health studies. Some things are quite clear and apply to all humans. For example: you need vitamin C in your diet or you will get scurvy. Then less general rules that might not apply to you given your genetics and behavior. Vitamin D supplements? Maybe, but probably won't hurt. Drinking Milk? Very variable on its benefits and costs to different people. Down to things that some people should do and others should not do depending on genetics and behavior (most studies these days). Massive individual genetic testing and constant cellphone behavior monitoring might be able to produce decent studies in the future for your specific attributes, but for now advice from parents and grandparents may be the best you can do.
  - sgt101 9y ago
    Why would cell phone data help?
    - sgt101 9y ago
      Genuine question... answers?
      - njarboe 9y ago
        Most studies use self-reported behaviors for how people behave. More invasive studies (as some people have mentioned in this comment section) show that self reporting is inaccurate and, for example, people eat many more calories than they self report. If you have some system of automatic recording of behavior, which smart-phones might be able to do, and individual DNA results, then these large scale studies might be able to tease out what is healthy behavior for people with specific DNA.
        sgt101 9y ago
evo_9 9y ago
Yeah I have gone and done it, I have decreased my calories by roughly 30% in the past year or so and dropped around 30 pounds in the process, plus an aggressive vitamin and supplement routine, along with taking metformin. I also workout 7 days a week including playing hockey 2, sometimes 3 days (and also working out before or after), the group I skate with is highly skilled and the intensity is pretty up there, I've been skating with them for about 15 years or so. I just turned 50 but am regularly assumed to be 36, the age everyone always guess... including by my gf's parents who are just a few years older than me. I am a rather crazy outlier though, I actually enjoy working out and do a hundred+ pull-ups a week, and even on my light workout days tend to do at least 20 or so just to loosen up a bit.
- pmiller2 9y ago
  I'm assuming you're not diabetic, so how did you persuade a doctor to prescribe metformin?
- d1zzy 9y ago
  (this may be an unpopular opinion but...) The problem with having a healthy lifestyle is that our lives aren't statistics. Big number theory does not apply, we only have one draw, one life and if it happens that we are one of those unlucky ones to get lung cancer while never having smoked or generally lead a healthy life then we still die within a year and there's nothing we can do about it. Any drastic lifestyle change has costs: serious time, commitment, money and we sacrifice opportunities, things that we could be doing/enjoying instead. So my advice is: for anyone deciding to drastically change their lifestyle to a "healthier" one, do so for all the _other_ reasons (feeling fit and good, looking younger, improved relationships, having more energy, etc) but not expecting for that to increase your life span. Because then you may be up for a one nasty disappointment when cancer strikes and you are left wondering why did you do all that, why did you sacrifice so much. You better have a good answer when that happens is what I'm saying. :) (and that is true no matter what lifestyle you lead)
  - csallen 9y ago
    I have two ways of thinking about death that I've found helpful. The first is to sincerely imagine that I will die in 10 years. That's far enough away not to require drastic changes in my life — I still want to work hard on something that I'm passionate about — but close enough to remind me not to fuck around and take these years for granted. There's also a bonus that, if I do happen to run into some bad luck and have my life expectancy cut short, then it won't come as such a shock, because I've been living like it's my last decade anyway. And if that doesn't come to pass and I live a normal life, I'll feel more gratitude for it. The second trick I use is to imagine that reincarnation is true, but that instead of "coming back" as plankton or a bug or another person, I come back as me and relive my life, over and over again, forever. In that situation, I'd want to optimize to have a great quality of life, and spend as little of it as possible worrying about my inevitable death, or agonizing over things that have gone wrong in my past. Since my rebirth is inevitable, I'd just be dooming myself to future agonizing. It sounds morbid, but I've found that this helps me to recover a bit when I feel down about something.

baxtr 9y ago

This is really great! Thanks for the link. I think you should post it to HN

musha68k 9y ago

Thanks for sharing – always those poor monkeys though... An even stronger data point to me would be the actual people of Okinawa who are (were?) among the healthiest and oldest in the world. In addition to having a high quality diet and a rich social life in general, they are practicing “hara hachi bu” – the confucian tradition of always eating only until “about 80% full”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hara_hachi_bun_me https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hara_hachi_bun_me

mysterypie 9y ago

It's an interesting well-written article, but you realize that their main point was that it contradicts the earlier calorie-restriction study: "The Nature authors found no increase in lifespan; the calorically restricted animals lived no longer, statistically, than their well-fed cousins." They try to reconcile the studies: maybe it's the natural-ingredient foods vs the refined foods, maybe it's the generous diet vs the more-than-generous free-feeding, or conceding that the monkey's don't live longer, but they live healthier. IMO, the best paragraph from the article was this: "Many of us simply roll our eyes and click away when yet another medical study contradicts the last study—so what else is new? Coffee’s bad for you, until it’s good for you—and so is red wine. Antioxidants are essential, or they’re useless. And so on." Other than some very basic common sense things -- like don't eat rat poison -- I never find that these kinds of studies lead to correct and actionable information about how to slow down aging or how to lead your life. And it's extremely frustrating to even try.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
njarboe 9y ago
I think that individual genetics and behaviors are very important for these kind of health studies. Some things are quite clear and apply to all humans. For example: you need vitamin C in your diet or you will get scurvy. Then less general rules that might not apply to you given your genetics and behavior. Vitamin D supplements? Maybe, but probably won't hurt. Drinking Milk? Very variable on its benefits and costs to different people. Down to things that some people should do and others should not do depending on genetics and behavior (most studies these days). Massive individual genetic testing and constant cellphone behavior monitoring might be able to produce decent studies in the future for your specific attributes, but for now advice from parents and grandparents may be the best you can do.
- sgt101 9y ago
  Why would cell phone data help?
  - sgt101 9y ago
    Genuine question... answers?
    - njarboe 9y ago
      Most studies use self-reported behaviors for how people behave. More invasive studies (as some people have mentioned in this comment section) show that self reporting is inaccurate and, for example, people eat many more calories than they self report. If you have some system of automatic recording of behavior, which smart-phones might be able to do, and individual DNA results, then these large scale studies might be able to tease out what is healthy behavior for people with specific DNA.
      - sgt101 9y ago

evo_9 9y ago

Yeah I have gone and done it, I have decreased my calories by roughly 30% in the past year or so and dropped around 30 pounds in the process, plus an aggressive vitamin and supplement routine, along with taking metformin. I also workout 7 days a week including playing hockey 2, sometimes 3 days (and also working out before or after), the group I skate with is highly skilled and the intensity is pretty up there, I've been skating with them for about 15 years or so. I just turned 50 but am regularly assumed to be 36, the age everyone always guess... including by my gf's parents who are just a few years older than me. I am a rather crazy outlier though, I actually enjoy working out and do a hundred+ pull-ups a week, and even on my light workout days tend to do at least 20 or so just to loosen up a bit.

pmiller2 9y ago
I'm assuming you're not diabetic, so how did you persuade a doctor to prescribe metformin?
d1zzy 9y ago
(this may be an unpopular opinion but...) The problem with having a healthy lifestyle is that our lives aren't statistics. Big number theory does not apply, we only have one draw, one life and if it happens that we are one of those unlucky ones to get lung cancer while never having smoked or generally lead a healthy life then we still die within a year and there's nothing we can do about it. Any drastic lifestyle change has costs: serious time, commitment, money and we sacrifice opportunities, things that we could be doing/enjoying instead. So my advice is: for anyone deciding to drastically change their lifestyle to a "healthier" one, do so for all the _other_ reasons (feeling fit and good, looking younger, improved relationships, having more energy, etc) but not expecting for that to increase your life span. Because then you may be up for a one nasty disappointment when cancer strikes and you are left wondering why did you do all that, why did you sacrifice so much. You better have a good answer when that happens is what I'm saying. :) (and that is true no matter what lifestyle you lead)
- csallen 9y ago
  I have two ways of thinking about death that I've found helpful. The first is to sincerely imagine that I will die in 10 years. That's far enough away not to require drastic changes in my life — I still want to work hard on something that I'm passionate about — but close enough to remind me not to fuck around and take these years for granted. There's also a bonus that, if I do happen to run into some bad luck and have my life expectancy cut short, then it won't come as such a shock, because I've been living like it's my last decade anyway. And if that doesn't come to pass and I live a normal life, I'll feel more gratitude for it. The second trick I use is to imagine that reincarnation is true, but that instead of "coming back" as plankton or a bug or another person, I come back as me and relive my life, over and over again, forever. In that situation, I'd want to optimize to have a great quality of life, and spend as little of it as possible worrying about my inevitable death, or agonizing over things that have gone wrong in my past. Since my rebirth is inevitable, I'd just be dooming myself to future agonizing. It sounds morbid, but I've found that this helps me to recover a bit when I feel down about something.