5 ms·

“After 8 months of Blueprint I reduced my epigenetic age by 5.1 yrs in 7 months”

26 points by yasp 4y ago

nells 4y ago
Have you seen those meals? I’d rather kill myself here and now
- trash3 4y ago
- rwky 4y ago
  I stopped at the cost $62.91 / day (vary by geography)
- Bouncingsoul1 4y ago
  Costs more per day than the food for my whole family and not even includes Weißbier, I'll pass
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  Honestly, if you remove the ton of supplements he takes for dubious reason, only look at the meal and realise you can probably substitute some of the most expensive ingredients for similar but cheaper ones, it's just a fairly sane vegan diet: protein rich beans and grains, steamed greens, mushrooms, olive oil, fatty nuts. No idea why it costs him so much.
  - chubot 4y ago
    Yeah that was my thought too when skimming over it ... A lot of it is just whole plant-based foods, and 90% of people will probably get all the benefit from just that, leaving aside all the supplements. The one thing I think is good is the variety of ingredients/produce, and that can be fairly expensive (but probably not as expensive as what they're charging). You can do it cheaply if you live near a market, and have multiple people with a similar diet
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
m348e912 4y ago
You know what I find interesting. You pick any food or diet that you believe is healthy, and you'll find someone with some sort of credentials that will tell you otherwise. https://www.kevinstock.io/health/health-dangers-of-cruciferous-vegetables/ https://www.kevinstock.io/health/health-dangers-of-crucifero...
- arcticfox 4y ago
  Well now I don’t know what to believe about one more thing…
  - coffeebeqn 4y ago
    Human diets have been like that for as long as I remember. The whole cholesterol hysteria of the 90s? converted me to just not consider that science to be settled for decades. Eating a lot of veggies seems to have held up so far
- CSSer 4y ago
  This is pretty funny. It’s like how tomatoes are bad for you because they’re in the nightshade family. I suppose moderation is all I can suggest.
- capitainenemo 4y ago
  Halfway through the article he brushes off hormetic effects. But it seems likely that a lot of things associated with health and longevity are probably hormetic. Cold showers, hot baths, moderate exercise, low amounts of alcohol, intermittent fasting, low amounts of psychological stress... all have papers documenting beneficial effects with at least some speculating due to activating body's repair systems (hormesis). Anyway, the idea that the beneficial effects of vegetables are due to plant defenses isn't an unusual idea - this was on the front page of HN a while back. https://nautil.us/fruits-and-vegetables-are-trying-to-kill-you-234982/ https://nautil.us/fruits-and-vegetables-are-trying-to-kill-y... Oh, and on the meat front, if you're into that, I'd suggest fish and birds, avoiding mammals due to the neu5gc autoimmune thing. Or at least, don't overdo it on the mammal.
bergenty 4y ago
I think the most useful thing here is the list of supplements at the end. Isn’t there a study from this week that says nicotinamide is carcinogenic?
- blacksmith_tb 4y ago
  Not precisely, but it appears to make existing cancers worse[1], so definitely risky. 1: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221111155632.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221111155632.h...
fabian2k 4y ago
I would not put much trust into some poorly-understood biomarkers, especially ones that have grandiose naming like epigenetic age. The naming alone implies more than I suspect these markers can deliver. The price is also kinda ridiculous, $70 a day for meals and supplements.
- jandrese 4y ago
  Holy crap that's over $2,100/month! Over $25,500/year. Even discounting the regular food you are not eating this is crazy.
  - googlryas 4y ago
    Well, the guy sold his company for $800M. It's pocket change to him.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  Especially when an example of a biomarker is ability to hear out of the left ear. Yes, fixing that (if you could) could improve your quality of life, but unless there's a train coming from the left side, it won't make you live longer. Those tests also seem ripe for the nocebo effect. All this testing and measuring seems a coping mechanism for trying to find and control some sort of objective measures in squishy, uncertain, biology.
  - fabian2k 4y ago
    As far as I understood the epigenetic age this refers to are a bunch of DNA methylation tests. All the other tests are in addition to this.
    - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
      Ah, that makes more sense, though it still looks like someone with anxiety around the uncontrollable to me.
wintercarver 4y ago
For someone familiar with the science can you comment on the typical uncertainty/variation in epigenetic age measurement? I love error bars, wish they were mandatory.
bergenty 4y ago
You’re taking melatonin every night? Good luck trying to fall asleep without it in a few months.
VeninVidiaVicii 4y ago
This screams of Goodhart’s Law, or gaming the metrics. Once you go around messing with biomarker of some disease (i.e., age) the metrics are no longer indicative of the underlying phenomenon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  Depends on the disease. Mess around with the biomarker for scurvy and all that will happen is you cure the scurvy.
V__ 4y ago
Epigenetic clocks are really hit-and-miss and are mostly used at population levels and not a good way to measure changes in a single human. They may be accurate +/- 5 years, which he even says in his footnotes. Which is not to say he didn't get a lot healthier, but the focus on biological age/epigenetic clocks seems to be more of a marketing instrument than anything else.
ramesh31 4y ago
Where are the bodies at, Bryan?
29athrowaway 4y ago
I bet $100 this guy will mess up his kidneys soon.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
feet 4y ago
Okay this I find a bit absurd: >Fitness Scores (ref: ACSM) Scoring equal t to top 10% of 18 year olds in the following: Bench press single rep max, 235lbs Why are you comparing your max lifts against an 18 year old? Since when are they the ones lifting the most? This doesn't seem to indicate anything at all It usually takes years of training to get to big weights and most 18 year olds don't lift at all so that "top 10%" statement is meaningless
- wellthisisgreat 4y ago
  Yeah sorry 235lbs 1RM isn’t a good metric even for an 18 y/o lifter Maybe he’s comparing them to look good or b/c he’s measuring against his children (he mentions teenage son)
  - vsareto 4y ago
    This guy isn't a lifter though, and 235lbs at 160lbs bodyweight is really good for someone who isn't.
    - wellthisisgreat 4y ago
      It’s better than not lifting but it’s nothing to brag about for sure. Most people I know who train or lift and are ~160lbs usually do 225lbs for reps (~5 or so). I wouldn’t even comment on this, but did catch my eye and knocked some credibility points off / made me question significance of other metrics
    - feet 4y ago
      I had a friend who was 150-160 with a 315 max so is it really? Others who are that weight can hit 350+ To be able to bench over 200 you have to have done at least some chest/press training That specific lift wasn't even what I took issue with, it was the fact that he's comparing himself against 18 year olds. The first lift was just left in my copy/paste
zxcvbn4038 4y ago
Someone should make a fad diet calendar, you can have a different diet every day! Whatever happened to the ancestral diet? I was looking forward to sauerbraten and spatzle every meal.
- niemandhier 4y ago
  Spätzle was poor people food, so it does not combine well with Sauerbraten in the eyes of the ancestors.
westcort 4y ago
The muscle definition is impressive. I think there are less expensive ways to achieve this, though. Some of the supplements are questionable here. I would be careful taking NADH supplements given some conflicting evidence of benefit.[0] I would also be careful about supplements in general given that perhaps half do not contain the main ingredient listed on the label and unlisted contaminants and fillers are often present.[1] References: 0. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cancer-research-points-to-key-unknowns-about-popular-antiaging-supplements/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cancer-research-p... 1. https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7015-11-222 https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-...
jabthedang 4y ago

26 points by yasp 4y ago

nells 4y ago

Have you seen those meals? I’d rather kill myself here and now

trash3 4y ago
rwky 4y ago
I stopped at the cost $62.91 / day (vary by geography)
Bouncingsoul1 4y ago
Costs more per day than the food for my whole family and not even includes Weißbier, I'll pass
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
Honestly, if you remove the ton of supplements he takes for dubious reason, only look at the meal and realise you can probably substitute some of the most expensive ingredients for similar but cheaper ones, it's just a fairly sane vegan diet: protein rich beans and grains, steamed greens, mushrooms, olive oil, fatty nuts. No idea why it costs him so much.
- chubot 4y ago
  Yeah that was my thought too when skimming over it ... A lot of it is just whole plant-based foods, and 90% of people will probably get all the benefit from just that, leaving aside all the supplements. The one thing I think is good is the variety of ingredients/produce, and that can be fairly expensive (but probably not as expensive as what they're charging). You can do it cheaply if you live near a market, and have multiple people with a similar diet

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

m348e912 4y ago

You know what I find interesting. You pick any food or diet that you believe is healthy, and you'll find someone with some sort of credentials that will tell you otherwise. https://www.kevinstock.io/health/health-dangers-of-cruciferous-vegetables/ https://www.kevinstock.io/health/health-dangers-of-crucifero...

arcticfox 4y ago
Well now I don’t know what to believe about one more thing…
- coffeebeqn 4y ago
  Human diets have been like that for as long as I remember. The whole cholesterol hysteria of the 90s? converted me to just not consider that science to be settled for decades. Eating a lot of veggies seems to have held up so far
CSSer 4y ago
This is pretty funny. It’s like how tomatoes are bad for you because they’re in the nightshade family. I suppose moderation is all I can suggest.
capitainenemo 4y ago
Halfway through the article he brushes off hormetic effects. But it seems likely that a lot of things associated with health and longevity are probably hormetic. Cold showers, hot baths, moderate exercise, low amounts of alcohol, intermittent fasting, low amounts of psychological stress... all have papers documenting beneficial effects with at least some speculating due to activating body's repair systems (hormesis). Anyway, the idea that the beneficial effects of vegetables are due to plant defenses isn't an unusual idea - this was on the front page of HN a while back. https://nautil.us/fruits-and-vegetables-are-trying-to-kill-you-234982/ https://nautil.us/fruits-and-vegetables-are-trying-to-kill-y... Oh, and on the meat front, if you're into that, I'd suggest fish and birds, avoiding mammals due to the neu5gc autoimmune thing. Or at least, don't overdo it on the mammal.

bergenty 4y ago

I think the most useful thing here is the list of supplements at the end. Isn’t there a study from this week that says nicotinamide is carcinogenic?

blacksmith_tb 4y ago
Not precisely, but it appears to make existing cancers worse[1], so definitely risky. 1: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221111155632.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221111155632.h...

fabian2k 4y ago

I would not put much trust into some poorly-understood biomarkers, especially ones that have grandiose naming like epigenetic age. The naming alone implies more than I suspect these markers can deliver. The price is also kinda ridiculous, $70 a day for meals and supplements.

jandrese 4y ago
Holy crap that's over $2,100/month! Over $25,500/year. Even discounting the regular food you are not eating this is crazy.
- googlryas 4y ago
  Well, the guy sold his company for $800M. It's pocket change to him.
SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
Especially when an example of a biomarker is ability to hear out of the left ear. Yes, fixing that (if you could) could improve your quality of life, but unless there's a train coming from the left side, it won't make you live longer. Those tests also seem ripe for the nocebo effect. All this testing and measuring seems a coping mechanism for trying to find and control some sort of objective measures in squishy, uncertain, biology.
- fabian2k 4y ago
  As far as I understood the epigenetic age this refers to are a bunch of DNA methylation tests. All the other tests are in addition to this.
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    Ah, that makes more sense, though it still looks like someone with anxiety around the uncontrollable to me.

wintercarver 4y ago

For someone familiar with the science can you comment on the typical uncertainty/variation in epigenetic age measurement? I love error bars, wish they were mandatory.

bergenty 4y ago

You’re taking melatonin every night? Good luck trying to fall asleep without it in a few months.

VeninVidiaVicii 4y ago

This screams of Goodhart’s Law, or gaming the metrics. Once you go around messing with biomarker of some disease (i.e., age) the metrics are no longer indicative of the underlying phenomenon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

thaumasiotes 4y ago
Depends on the disease. Mess around with the biomarker for scurvy and all that will happen is you cure the scurvy.

V__ 4y ago

Epigenetic clocks are really hit-and-miss and are mostly used at population levels and not a good way to measure changes in a single human. They may be accurate +/- 5 years, which he even says in his footnotes. Which is not to say he didn't get a lot healthier, but the focus on biological age/epigenetic clocks seems to be more of a marketing instrument than anything else.

ramesh31 4y ago

Where are the bodies at, Bryan?

29athrowaway 4y ago

I bet $100 this guy will mess up his kidneys soon.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

feet 4y ago

Okay this I find a bit absurd: >Fitness Scores (ref: ACSM) Scoring equal t to top 10% of 18 year olds in the following: Bench press single rep max, 235lbs Why are you comparing your max lifts against an 18 year old? Since when are they the ones lifting the most? This doesn't seem to indicate anything at all It usually takes years of training to get to big weights and most 18 year olds don't lift at all so that "top 10%" statement is meaningless

wellthisisgreat 4y ago
Yeah sorry 235lbs 1RM isn’t a good metric even for an 18 y/o lifter Maybe he’s comparing them to look good or b/c he’s measuring against his children (he mentions teenage son)
- vsareto 4y ago
  This guy isn't a lifter though, and 235lbs at 160lbs bodyweight is really good for someone who isn't.
  - wellthisisgreat 4y ago
    It’s better than not lifting but it’s nothing to brag about for sure. Most people I know who train or lift and are ~160lbs usually do 225lbs for reps (~5 or so). I wouldn’t even comment on this, but did catch my eye and knocked some credibility points off / made me question significance of other metrics
  - feet 4y ago
    I had a friend who was 150-160 with a 315 max so is it really? Others who are that weight can hit 350+ To be able to bench over 200 you have to have done at least some chest/press training That specific lift wasn't even what I took issue with, it was the fact that he's comparing himself against 18 year olds. The first lift was just left in my copy/paste

zxcvbn4038 4y ago

Someone should make a fad diet calendar, you can have a different diet every day! Whatever happened to the ancestral diet? I was looking forward to sauerbraten and spatzle every meal.

niemandhier 4y ago
Spätzle was poor people food, so it does not combine well with Sauerbraten in the eyes of the ancestors.

westcort 4y ago

The muscle definition is impressive. I think there are less expensive ways to achieve this, though. Some of the supplements are questionable here. I would be careful taking NADH supplements given some conflicting evidence of benefit.[0] I would also be careful about supplements in general given that perhaps half do not contain the main ingredient listed on the label and unlisted contaminants and fillers are often present.[1] References: 0. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cancer-research-points-to-key-unknowns-about-popular-antiaging-supplements/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cancer-research-p... 1. https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7015-11-222 https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-...

jabthedang 4y ago