#37

On the other hand acarbose and SGLT2i barely lower glucose levels in non diabetic humans.

5 Likes
#38

The role of acarbose is to blunt the glucose spikes from the carbs intake which it does very effectively.

Here is a little experiment I did. I ate around 13:00 a rather low carbs meal with some homemade sourdough bread, an honeycrisp apple and 100mg acarbose => no glucose spike
Then I ate a similar meal around 18:00 without acarbose => +37mg/dl spike. Very short BTW which is good as it shows good insulin sensitivity.
image

Clearly the area under the curve of that spike is not much and it’s even compensated by a dip in glucose after it so, in the end, the AUC change is minimal if any.

6 Likes
#39

This is an interesting and maybe still partially unresolved question. Based on the evidence, it would seem that all reductions in BG (to some point where the curve goes the other direction) are beneficial. I wonder if some other factors are in play as well. For example, I feel “not quite right” when my BG drops into the 80’s, which is often held as a target. I feel great when it is in the 90’s or even in the very low 100’s. The negative feelings in the 70’s could be some kind of conditioned response that might change if I maintained it at that level or it could be due to hard wired individual differences. For me, steel cut oatmeal almost always causes my BG to drop into the 80’s a few hours after eating it.

2 Likes
#40

How reliable are these sources. The one above is not real for example. Episode #112 was with Ned David I think and as far as I remember Peter has never had Brad Stanfield on his podcast.

Similar there are refs to a Drive podcast with Robert Lustig - but it does not seem like Peter has ever had him on the podcast either?

3 Likes
#41

AI generated so … not reliable.

1 Like
#42

You can compare to this thread with many similar biomarkers What are your top 10 biomarkers to track for improving healthspan and longevity? - #70 by RapAdmin

2 Likes
#43

I listened to R. lustig a while back on the Drive, about fructose. I remember he said fresh fruit is all right, which I agree with, for some people and purposes, and especially in the hot season it’s an excellent choice. Lots of unjustified demonization.

2 Likes
#44

@mccoy Thx. Seems that the “AI hallucination” was about the episode number:

The Drive podcast #82 with Dr. Robert Lustig

Episode 82 was actually

2 Likes
#45

It’s almost 2025, people should know about AI hallucinating sources by now.
AI needs to always be checked in the state it is in now.

1 Like
#46

Yes, but is there even a need to do so? or that should be taken as a good thing since too low of glucose level would be a problem? If glucose is at normal levels, I’d rather not take acarbose and SGLT2I’s or if I’m taking them I’d be doing for other reasons, (i.e. simply maintenance and microbiome etc…) and taking them in very low doses.

1 Like
#47

Great info and very helpful @AnUser. thank you!

Has anyone mentioned PSA and prostate health (don’t see it in the list) and possible preventative measures?

1 Like
#48

They do lower glucose variability and especially the spikes. Lowering the spikes might be quite important.

2 Likes
#49

Do we have evidence that SGLT2i really lower spikes on normoglycemic people?

1 Like
#50

N=1, yes, for me completely. As measured by CGM. See my writeup here: Canagliflozin for Anti-aging (part 2)

8 Likes
#51

@adssx

I saw the same trend during a short stint on Cana during the AgelessRx trial

Hopefully AglessRx will show their data across the participants at some point in some form

4 Likes
#52

DrFraser as a 71 year old woman I get periodic DEXA scans but am only told my bone density. Do they measure the other stuff and just don’t tell me or do I need to ask? Thanks.

#53

So there is the traditional use of DEXA which just looks at bone density, and then the newer use of DEXA, which isn’t covered by MediCare or Insurance, that is a whole body composition DEXA.

I did a blog on this which I think covers things - in some regions on the west coast, you can get this as cheap as $39. In many regions you may pay up to $199 for it but it shouldn’t be that high.

5 Likes
#54

Good to know I can’t just substitute the newer one either as it doesn’t show the bones as well as the one specific for bones. Thanks! I’ve been wondering why we aren’t given all the information. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#55

The whole body DEXA does a pretty good job on bones, it’s just not optimized for it. If you have suggestion of an osteopenia or osteoporosis, then getting a dedicated bone DEXA is reasonable (or if you have known low Z scores on bone).

3 Likes
#56

Bodyspec.com dexa body composition reports include a ‘bone report’ that looks like this:

image

It funny that they say ‘this isn’t a bone density exam’ and then they label the chart ‘bone density’.

They throw everyting in a pot, then calculate misleading t- and z-scores from that. It would have been better to receive no report, than what they produce.

A bone density scan intended for that purpose will focus on the spine, hip, and femur. My T-scores are actually in the -2.0 to -3.0 range.

4 Likes