[extropy-chat] where to go with supplementation in a post-Nick-Lane world ?

[Ensel Sharon]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006, Brian Atkins wrote:

> Well for one thing, there are many supplements that act via other methods than 
> anti-oxidation, so look into those. A simple example would be vitamin D. There 
> is a pretty overwhelming evidence at this point that it can help prevent 
> multiple cancers and also help with other problems if you take it at levels 
> above the current recommended daily levels.


Ok, but are we talking about "levels above the current recommended daily
levels" by a factor of 2 or a factor of 20 ?  Or in other words, levels I
can get from foods, etc., without a supplementation regime ?

I remain very skeptical that any combination of foods or nutrients or
exposures or lifestyles that are available in the natural world will ever
produce meaningful longevity gains.  If they could, someone would have
noticed it 2000 years ago.

My guess is that nutritional and behavioral optimization are fairly maxed
out - perhaps we can raise the average age to 110 or 120, with some
statistical outlyers getting to 130-140, but real gains in longevity will
come from a technological solution that was not available to people
thousands of years ago, like antioxidants and high fiber and whole grains
and good exercise were.


> Also I think at this point there are some known supplements that can penetrate 
> the mitochondria, with yet more in testing and under development.


Can anyone comment further on this ?  I found:

http://www.aapsj.org/view.asp?art=aapsj080232

But I am not sure how this jibes with the free radicals being essential
signaling mechanisms ... if we suppress those it would seem we would get
other negative effects, namely, broken cells hanging around longer than
they should...

IANAD.  Shrug.