#1

Hi Everyone

I would be very interested to know your thoughts about the following video:

3 Likes
#2

As with all of Brad Stanfieldā€™s videos I have watched this seems well researched and follows clinical guidelines for standard of care. It covers a broad range of subjects. Did you have specific questions about it?

4 Likes
#3

Itā€™s really hard to get people to change their minds about supplements they like even when they are thoroughly debunked, especially when they have been popularized and touted in the popular press such as resveratrol. Resveratrol is still being touted in the press and on popular websites.

8 Likes
#4

Stanfield I do not waste my time.

As I have posted several times.

Ā°TIME - the most valuable asset any person has.

  • "Time is our most valuable asset, yet we tend to waste it, kill it and spend it rather than invest it. *
    ~ Jim Rohn
#5

And yet you keep wasting your time with replies like this. Why is that?

6 Likes
#6

To make people ask questions.

#7

Good solid evidence. I agree with what he says.

5 Likes
#8

I like the way he has turned, finally he ditched pushing Do Not Age, and is more honest. I like this rant he gave this time. I hope he continue with this style. I will get back to subscribing to his channel.

1 Like
#9

Here is Dr. Stanfieldā€™s roadmap, or longevity guide, published last month:

6 Likes
#10

I donā€™t see any mention of aging itself here. Is Stanfield not a believer in the geroscience hypothesis? Unless he outlines his reasons for rejecting geroscience viewpoints, I donā€™t find his advice especially useful.

1 Like
#11

This could be his best video. Time to put the last nails in the coffins of Resveratrol, Metformin, low protein diets, and time restricted eating.

2 Likes
#12

@Lost i think his primary interest is solid preventative health care, and is you stay healthy, you extend healthspan and lifespan.

2 Likes
#13

Hi Everyone

Thank you very much indeed for all of your replies.

It seems that the Internet is full of arguments about what is best for your health and often, both sides of the argument seem equally convincing leaving me not knowing what to believe. However, I am 100% in favour of debating this sort of thing. I would much prefer to be confused by hearing both sides of the argument than to have one side censored. This is because it is absolutely impossible to guarantee that the organisation doing the censoring will always be on the correct side of the argument. No organisation on this planet is immune to corruption and no organization has a monopoly over the truth.

I am quite possibly misinterpreting the video but it seems to me that Dr Stanfield might be against the objective of suppressing MTOR and promoting autophagy for anti-aging purposes. I think that these are the objectives of Rapamycin. I would be very grateful for any comments about this.

2 Likes
#14

I donā€™t know that Stanfield is against Rapa, but itā€™s unlikely that heā€™ll say anything in favor of it without solid human data which will be a long time coming. Maybe really good dog data would sway him?

3 Likes
#15

Dr. Stanfield believes in the potential of Rapamycin because he is funding a Rapamycin study to determine how it affects health.

7 Likes
#16

The video is a good topic, but I donā€™t think his comparison of mouse and human metabolism necessarily carries forward into.autophagy metabolism. When it comes to eating windows not eating too late in the evening is I think helpful.

1 Like
#17

image
image1125Ɨ1018 119 KB

4 Likes
#18

When it comes to higher protein intake, the difference between human and mouse becomes very important. I doubt that an elderly frail mouse who trips will fall and break a hip and get a brain bleed.

5 Likes
#19

To the extent he is promulgating relevant guidelines, which almost by definition are best-guess conservative advice given the limited evidence available, I have no complaints. However in the video he makes positive claims against various geroscience based ideas, without either engaging with the arguments for them or providing good arguments against.

Take the example of lower protein diet (the only section of the video I watched thoroughly). His argument seems to be that since sarcopenia is a grave threat in old age, one should eat extra protein in, say, their 30ā€™s to bank up muscle tissue. There is no evidence to support this, given how dynamic muscle tissue is. One wouldnā€™t recommend hyperventilating to bank up oxygen against future COPD, for comparison.

If he were to say that the available evidence isnā€™t strong enough to recommend a low protein diet for young or middle age adults, this would be great, but heā€™s not. Heā€™s saying the evidence points the other way.

1 Like
#20

That makes no sense. Youā€™re comparing muscle mass with blood oxygen?

I think the current standard of care is to build and keep muscle mass. He gave 5 references supporting this.

5 Likes