#102

@Jacob_F I pretty much agree with your analysis on Dr. Brad. Except, I do think he is trying to make himself into a brand, but he is trying to provide the correct information.

For instance, he has spoken out against some of the supplements that his one sponsor Do Not Age sells although he has promoted others that he believes are useful. I don’t always agree with him though.

6 Likes
#103

Brad Stanfield is probably the worst of these 3 in my mind, Not only because of my hatred of youtube “gurus” and their click bait headlines. But he chooses topics that he knows get attention and picks the papers to quote from while discard the ones that does not fit into his agenda. His latest video on Vitamin C is the most BS I have ever seen, where he ignore the older papers published previously on this Vitamin.
If a supplement company needs a bunch of YouTubers and online profilers to sell their products, they probably are not the best quality. I have never seen DoNotAge products been tested on Consumer Lab, and it is probably a reason for why they avoid sending their products there for testing and comparison.
Would you buy a stock recommended by a youtube financial advisor that is sponsored by that company that issues these stock?

2 Likes
#104

Some Do Not Age products have been lab tested, like their NMN. They seem to sell quality products. However I buy mostly the NOW brand.

1 Like
#105

Which older papers are you referencing to?
There is no heuristic in science AFAIK specifically to use older papers just for the sake of it, they must be good in other ways. Many times older papers are just plain wrong as science progresses.

Looking at his references he is citing multiple randomized controlled trials and cochrane reviews (highest level evidence possible).

3 Likes
#106

People being people. For some reason people (myself included) need to build camps around certain supplements, lifestyles or medications, anything that goes against that is like insulting them personally. Evidence contrary to their opinions are never received. The end goal of healthspan/longevity matters less and being right, at any cost, matters more. Just look at the data, take the best from “influencers”, or nothing at all. Look for what can benefit you, be pragmatic… And don’t believe your supplement or medication is 100% perfect and nothing can change your mind…

2 Likes
#107

Within this article it is a hundred links to pubmed. of different papers on Vitamin C

1 Like
#108

Vitamin C is obviously important and deficiency is very harmful.
I don’t see how higher dosages can decrease risk of atherosclerosis based on experiments in guinea pigs, and in petri dishes. RCTs on LDL show a small decrease in LDL. Lots of observational studies in that review which can infer association, not causation. Vitamin C and treating cancer I don’t know enough about.

2 Likes
#109

Right so we get to the heart of it. You have a strong bias against anyone on Youtube and therefore have lost your objectivity.

1 Like
#110

Okay, I will agree with you that he is building a brand, but I believe that his objective is to disseminate knowledge, and not to enrich himself. For now at least, his fulltime job is to practice medicine and he carries the full workload of any young doctor. I find Brad’s perspective as a practicing doctor to be very valuable, even relative to someone like Peter Attia who has advanced medical training, but not the day to day experience of being a fulltime healthcare practitioner.

I also agree with some of the other commenters that he sometimes gets it wrong, but is very receptive to constructive criticism and will revise his positions. I should mention that Dr Brad advises against taking Rapamycin because of the lack of human studies to demonstrate its efficacy. His current mission is to fill the gap by conducting the research that he feels is missing. (I hope he pulls it off, and I’m looking forward to seeing the results, but meanwhile, I’m taking the pills!)

There are a number of different personalities bringing us health and longevity insights. They all have their own motivations and their own biases and we are not privy to all that goes on in their heads. Thus, there is no one individual you can trust to get it right every time. I find Brad’s insights to be valuable and I think he is a good egg, relative to the others.

5 Likes
#111

What’ “advanceed medical” training?

#112

Unlike Michael Lustgarten, Stanfield does not provide links to the studies he cites. They are found below:

There were no significant interactions between agents for the primary end point, but those randomized to both active ascorbic acid and vitamin E experienced fewer strokes (P value for interaction, .03).

Conclusions After 7.5 years, low-dose antioxidant supplementation lowered total cancer incidence and all-cause mortality in men but not in women. Supplementation may be effective in men only because of their lower baseline status of certain antioxidants, especially of beta carotene.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD011114.pub2/full

Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that vitamin C supplementation reduces the risk of CVD in healthy participants and those at increased risk of CVD, but current evidence is limited to one trial of middle‐aged and older male physicians from the USA. There is limited low‐ and very low‐quality evidence currently on the effect of vitamin C supplementation and risk of CVD risk factors.

In the last citation, the first phrase was emphasized (bold) by Stanfield. The last sentence, however, indicates that it is hard to conclude one way or the other.

The dosages are also low (500 mg) in the first; the Cochrane review used 120 mg. Linus Pauling used, and recommended grams. So did Thomas Levy, MD.

From Stanfield’s own country, N = 1. A farmer beat swine flu with vit C.

1 Like
#113

There are only 73,787 papers on Vitamin C , a quick search on PubMed.

#114

Not all YouTubers, only the ones that has a strong intensive to push branded stuff of dubious quality. There are a few out there that are much better than Brad Stanfield that is not selling anything. The problem with online preachers that is sponsored by particular brands tends to sway in favor of their sponsors.
There was one of the DoNotAge pushers that recently had a video on youtube claiming his eyesight has improved because on NMN. And if you want to improve your eyesight you had to use that brand and of course use his discount code so he can collect his commission.
Utter shit

#115

They are in the video description

#116

Yes, but as @DeStrider mentioned up thread, Stanfield has made several videos criticizing the Resveratrol and NMN research despite receiving money from DoNotAge who sell those products.

Seems you have a strong case of cognitive dissonance.

1 Like
#117

I’m just saying, I wouldn’t be surprised if at least some of that money from his DoNotAge affiliation is being used to fund his Rapamycin trial, his Patreon is 100% used for that at least. That company also donated $10K to the trial.

#118

In my view Stanfield, $400.000 “rapamycin trial” is for hip national bank.

The “trial” will be useless to provide any data of value. 10 or16 people. If I recall, taking rapamycin and exercise…

The fact is it is way overprice and underpowered.

#119

The point seems to be setting up for a subsequent trial that will be more adequately powered.

This study is a test of an FDA-approved drug, Sirolimus (Rapamycin), being repurposed for the treatment of muscle aging in combination with exercise. The first phase is a proof-of-concept trial, designed to assess the safety, tolerability, feasibility, and trial design of weekly Sirolimus (Rapamycin) 6mg oral tablets or placebo dosing over a 13-week period, in combination with thrice-weekly at-home exercise programs. The trial will also assess improvement in the 30-Second Chair-Stand test after a 13-week exercise training program. This will enable an appropriate power calculation to be conducted to inform the number of patients required for a subsequent, superiority clinical trial.

https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=383703

$400K is not a lot of money for a billionaire or multi millionaire, if they wanted to get the ball rolling to see whether rapamycin works or not.

1 Like
#120

Well-done clinical trials (in developed countries) are extremely expensive. The TAME Metformin study cost is over $40 Million last time I looked, and they’ve been trying to raise the money for 7+ years I think.

I do like the “fast and cheap” model like the PEARL study, but those sadly don’t provide the depth of information and validity that a larger, more rigorous clinical study provides.

Personally, since these are generic drugs and no company will fund the clinical trials, my opinion is that the NIA should really get funding to do these types of clinical studies that have a large potential benefit to the population and healthcare system at large.

4 Likes
#121

$400 K for Pfizer seems like a very small sum, and the larger trial might cost a bit more. Considering the sales of rapamune seems like the expected value is positive for them. After all in most of Europe only Rapamune is used AFAIK.

1 Like