Any Prove Of Living Forever

[BingDing]

@ScurveDream

And living indefinitely would presuppose a nurturing environment, which we definitely don't have.
Sadly nothing is permanent in this world, if we can live out our days, experiencing each moment to the fullest and maintain complete autonomy and
control of our bodily functions, that's a massive win.

Plus, at some point, dying probably becomes something you crave, especially as other people in your lives go as well, and the world starts to become stranger and stranger
That being said, I think maintaining a high metabolic rate till the very end can help maintain an active interest in the world. I definitely don't want to spend the last years of my life completely 'out of it'.

+1 In Japan there is no proscription against taking your own life, it can be seen as honorable. I have a vague fantasy of jumping overboard on a whale watching trip and getting eaten by Orcas. That would be 1) absurdly weird, 2) cool as can be, and 3) much better than spending years declining in a nursing home, as my mother did.

 

[mrchibbs]

+1 In Japan there is no proscription against taking your own life, it can be seen as honorable. I have a vague fantasy of jumping overboard on a whale watching trip and getting eaten by Orcas. That would be 1) absurdly weird, 2) cool as can be, and 3) much better than spending years declining in a nursing home, as my mother did.

I have a college professor I met during my graduate studies and he's become my close friend, he's in his seventies and very robust in health, until recently had a young hot wife in her late 30s, and he's always told me he wants to die on a beach on his own terms.

I think at the very least, Ray's ideas are enough for you to expect to not spend years declining in a nursing home. Maintaining high thyroid function and spending time outside, and maintaining a purpose, and basic things like aspirin and a little alcohol, along with milk, should be more than enough to prevent dementia and maintain full function and autonomy until the very end.

 

[wavelength123]

I've thought about this. I think it's possible that civilizations that came before us also studied mortality, and maybe got as close or closer than anyone on this forum to understanding regeneration. But I think that watching the friends and family of your developmental years pass away would end most people's desire to keep going indefinitely.

yep, in Tolkien’s lore elves never die of old age and they seem to be pretty jaded after a while. Death is the “gift of men”. Just be a positive person and believe in reincarnation ‍ Might as well.

 

[damngoodcoffee]

Working on it. I'll come haunt you if I fail.

 

[mrchibbs]

Working on it. I'll come haunt you if I fail.

Same. If I don't live till I'm 150 at least I'll go and give Ray an earful!

 

[damngoodcoffee]

Same. If I don't live till I'm 150 at least I'll go and give Ray an earful!

But if Ray's still alive then maybe you were just doing it wrong.

 

[boris]

Prove that what I said is untrue. Regardless of what you think he has achieved, or how pathetic you think it is to say something that's true, he is an old man that is decaying and dying. Last year, I met and talked with a 92 year old man whose speech, skin, and hair were superior to Ray's. How will the foundations of your faith be shaken when you one day log on to this website and read the headline, "Ray Peat has died"?

Your writings lack coherency from the very beginning. What is the point of it being true or not if he stutters? Did I deny that he stutters? Does Peat deny it? Does Peat or anyone claim that he has "conquered" aging? And if yes, what does that have to do with stuttering or "conquering" stuttering?

How can anyone think this is true since we are surrounded by proof of the opposite? Everything that lives, dies. Sin brought death into the world. Why would anyone think Ray Peat has conquered aging when eyes can see and ears can hear that he, too, is dying? Ray can't even speak more than two or three words before pausing, stuttering, saying "um," then continuing.

Peat merely says there is no definite proof for death being something programmed into us. How does your argument about his stuttering even make a point?



On a side note: If you believe that we are machines that are programmed to start decaying after 25 years you fell for a lie.

 

[mrchibbs]

But if Ray's still alive then maybe you were just doing it wrong.

 

[mrchibbs]

On a side note: If you believe that we are machines that are programmed to start decaying after 25 years you fell for a lie.

This 100%. People are always shocked at these actors looking youthful in their 30s or later...as if we should be old and worn by that age? Actors are a stereotypical example, and they're obviously often picked for their good energetic resources, and they live stimulating lives, but they've managed to convince the ''working class'' people that they are basically done by the time they're 25 and they need to settle down, stop trying and just be a good little tax payer and consumer.

 

[redsun]

Living forever means not aging. If look at mythology of an immortal creature, the vampire being a good example, they don't age but can be killed.

To not age means the body is able to break down and rebuild all of its tissues perfectly indefinitely. Aging is the body naturally breaking down tissues (organs, muscle, bone) but unable to rebuild them perfectly.

If you never break down tissues and are too anabolic, you get stuck with older cells. This is why taking steroids are generally pro-aging, because they are incredibly anabolic and anti-catabolic. They make you build and build, but you don't tear old cells down. It also puts massive strain on resources through unnaturally high hormones that were not meant for the body.

The other case where you are too catabolic, meaning you are likely protein deficient and eat poorly so calorie intake constantly yoyos so you are catabolizing yourself too often but not rebuilding properly. Basically wasting away.

So when you see someone who is old and but seemingly ages very little, that is a person who is able to catabolize and rebuild their tissues very well, at least, much better than the average person. Thats all there is to it.

 

[mrchibbs]

Living forever means not aging. If look at mythology of an immortal creature, the vampire being a good example, they don't age but can be killed.

To not age means the body is able to break down and rebuild all of its tissues perfectly indefinitely. Aging is the body naturally breaking down tissues (organs, muscle, bone) but unable to rebuild them perfectly.

If you never break down tissues and are too anabolic, you get stuck with older cells. This is why taking steroids are generally pro-aging, because they are incredibly anabolic and anti-catabolic. They make you build and build, but you don't tear old cells down. It also puts massive strain on resources through unnaturally high hormones that were not meant for the body.

The other case where you are too catabolic, meaning you are likely protein deficient and eat poorly so calorie intake constantly yoyos so you are catabolizing yourself too often but not rebuilding properly. Basically wasting away.

So when you see someone who is old and but seemingly ages very little, that is a person who is able to catabolize and rebuild their tissues very well, at least, much better than the average person. Thats all there is to it.

you're hitting on something good here. I think that's why Ray speaks of cycles of stimulation and inhibition, and activating GABA, which turns focus inward on repair and restoration, and probably allows processes of 'autophagy' (I really need to learn more about autophagy) and this clears the way for cells to respond to stimulation in coherent, with proper anabolic processes.

I think estrogen, and other excitatory substances, or chronic activation of HPA, create a sort of messed up anabolic state where there's uncontrolled growth, and inflammation, leading to fibrosis, or even tumors where the growth processes have totally gone off the rails.

 

[redsun]

you're hitting on something good here. I think that's why Ray speaks of cycles of stimulation and inhibition, and activating GABA, which turns focus inward on repair and restoration, and probably allows processes of 'autophagy' (I really need to learn more about autophagy) and this clears the way for cells to respond to stimulation in coherent, with proper anabolic processes.

I think estrogen, and other excitatory substances, or chronic activation of HPA, create a sort of messed up anabolic state where there's uncontrolled growth, and inflammation, leading to fibrosis, or even tumors where the growth processes have totally gone off the rails.

Well I think we can say someone who is very bulky, easily gains weight is very anabolic. These people, by default, are almost always hypothyroid. I think adequate thyroid levels are necessary for proper catabolism as we already know and Peat himself has said this that thyroid increases sensitivity to adrenaline.

This is from a wiki page on the effects of T3:

"

• Increases cardiac output
• Increases heart rate
• Increases ventilation rate
• Increases basal metabolic rate
• Potentiates the effects of catecholamines (i.e. increases sympathetic activity)
• Potentiates brain development
• Thickens endometrium in females
• Increases catabolism of proteins and carbohydrates

"

It seems like T3 is the perfect embodiment of catabolism and thus I would suggest optimal T3 levels are necessary for proper catabolism. Also anyone who has ever used T3 can testify to that as well. Low T3 is equal to a low metabolic rate, very little going on, barely alive and repair and rebuilding of proteins is slowed and probably poorly done as well.

 

[mrchibbs]

Well I think we can say someone who is very bulky, easily gains weight is very anabolic. These people, by default, are almost always hypothyroid. I think adequate thyroid levels are necessary for proper catabolism as we already know and Peat himself has said this that thyroid increases sensitivity to adrenaline.

This is from a wiki page on the effects of T3:

"

• Increases cardiac output
• Increases heart rate
• Increases ventilation rate
• Increases basal metabolic rate
• Potentiates the effects of catecholamines (i.e. increases sympathetic activity)
• Potentiates brain development
• Thickens endometrium in females
• Increases catabolism of proteins and carbohydrates

"

It seems like T3 is the perfect embodiment of catabolism and thus I would suggest optimal T3 levels are necessary for proper catabolism. Also anyone who has ever used T3 can testify to that as well. Low T3 is equal to a low metabolic rate, very little going on, barely alive and repair and rebuilding of proteins is slowed and probably poorly done as well.

The problem is I think we and Ray interpret this as functional catabolism, but doctor will say that T3 is catabolic in a bad way and will routinely diagnose 'hyperthyroid' states that are extremely rare.

I think estrogen must be involved in very bulky people. They often have a similar profile as endurance runners who are thin as a rail, they are also hypothyroid as a rule. I want to research more the relationship between thyroid function and autophagy. I think cycles of high/low metabolic rates are normal, and I don't think there are cycles of thyroid hormone concentration during the day/weeks/seasons. My perspective is that thyroid is an hormone of metabolic efficiency, and isn't simply about ramping up energy production for no reason. For instance it acts as an antioxidant, helps glucose metabolism and a variety of enzymes. I would like to understand more about what sort of orderly cellular function it promotes, and how it affects autophagy in particular.

Ray has said elsewhere that basically when thyroid is really high, we almost don't need to rely on other hormones and therefore we become extremely sensitive to say a spontaneous small rise in cortisol or adrenaline.

 

[LeeLemonoil]

@mrchibbs

Yes, senescence, autophagy and apoptosis are intertwined and Ray lacks a bit in discussing (or even recognizing) these principles. I think that’s one of the aspects where his general concepts are a bit off or simply disproven by ongoing research.

Take Nad+. You sometimes get the impression that if only cells have a ample energy supply then it’s fundamentally going in the right direction. It isn’t. Senescent cells utilize a surplus of energy - and becoming more likely to go cancerous.

That’s why there has to be some sort of functional catabolism and senolysis. T3 figures in there, the thymus gland and so forth.
GABA signaling is very interesting in that regard, yes. I find it interesting that GABA increases elastin formation - the anti excitatory Mechanisms fundamentaly benefit integrity and structure it seems.

Estrogens. So many shades of grey. Definitely anabolic in a way, but for a huge price. It’s like mustering all resources to go to war and breaking down under the economical strain thereafter. Never forget steroid hormones are our immune system, the most evolved part of it.


To stay in my reductionists analogy: Ample energy provision (like Ray makes it a prerequisite for anything good in physiology) is necessary but nevertheless sufficient for a goods helthspan. T3 seems a major regulator here, but likely depends on other mechanism to check in abberancies

 

[Vinny]

I know that if nitric oxide goes too high stroke or heart attack. If you could keep nitric oxide low enough could you live forever?

Relax. After we die, we live forever.

 

[boris]

@Vinny

 

[Gone Peating]

Your writings lack coherency from the very beginning. What is the point of it being true or not if he stutters? Did I deny that he stutters? Does Peat deny it? Does Peat or anyone claim that he has "conquered" aging? And if yes, what does that have to do with stuttering or "conquering" stuttering?



Peat merely says there is no definite proof for death being something programmed into us. How does your argument about his stuttering even make a point?



On a side note: If you believe that we are machines that are programmed to start decaying after 25 years you fell for a lie.

Yea good point. Reminds me of when people in the medical industry used to think a human heart was only programmed with a certain number of beats like a car engine and so we should keep our heart rates low

 

[boris]

@Gone Peating @mrchibbs Like the analogy that Peat often mentions as wrong, of the brain as a punching card that will eventually run out of material. I vividly remember being told exactly that in school about the brain. And also that after 25 years our bodies will unstoppably degenerate. This had quite the effect on me the moment I heard it. Things like this get really ingrained into you and have a big influence on how you see life.

I also see this in people around me. These types of ideas have become kind of an unspoken dogma. Sick elderly that could still be easily helped are casually seen as lost causes who's "time has come" and kids getting cancer is just "something that happens" or "it's genetic".

 

[mrchibbs]

Yes, senescence, autophagy and apoptosis are intertwined and Ray lacks a bit in discussing (or even recognizing) these principles. I think that’s one of the aspects where his general concepts are a bit off or simply disproven by ongoing research.

I think Ray recognizes these things very well, but he has to simplify what he's saying in most interviews. Every time he gets the opportunity to go more in depth with a good interviewer (like Jodelle for instance), he brings a lot more nuance and details to his explanations. I don't think his 'general concepts' are off at all.

He just gets portrayed in a certain reductionist way, but a quick dive into his newsletters, and older books, and listening regularly to some of his interviews, is enough to realize how nuanced his perspective is on my things.

 

[mrchibbs]

@Gone Peating @mrchibbs Like the analogy that Peat often mentions as wrong, of the brain as a punching card that will eventually run out of material. I vividly remember being told exactly that in school about the brain. And also that after 25 years our bodies will unstoppably degenerate. This had quite the effect on me the moment I heard it. Things like this get really ingrained into you and have a big influence on how you see life.

I also see this in people around me. These types of ideas have become kind of an unspoken dogma. Sick elderly that could still be easily helped are casually seen as lost causes who's "time has come" and kids getting cancer is just "something that happens" or "it's genetic".

I remember it too, ''your brain is losing brain cells every minute''. A load of garbage. Kids are not being taught any semblance of an understanding of biology principles and physiology, and in some ways we're fed the necessary misconceptions from an early age so that we become good consumers of medications later on. The 'genetics' argument is especially damaging because it allows doctors and the industry to stop all discussions and to render people hopeless.