Bryan Johnson has Edited his DNA

[bambi]

2 minutes ago, integral said:

My perspective of him after watching all of his contacts is that I like his personality and his message which is generally very positive, he’s moving in the right direction.

From personal experience I can see that some of the stuff he’s doing is misguided and some of the test results are conflated with other things he’s doing as well as issues with long-term research not existing.

There is no long-term research for what he’s doing so he will be the first.

People that are science biased will view what he’s doing as incredibly intelligent because it’s hard for them to see how flawed science is when it comes to these matters.

Ah perfect, so you are claiming to be more intelligent then him and the whole scientific communtiy on this? Please lecture them with your wisdom, where did you obtain this wisdom?

Do you honeslty think that people are not aware of the limitations of studies, reductivity issues with measurements, confounding variables etc etc? Do you really think these people are that stupid and your so smart?

What is really happening is your pride and ego both envies and resents Bryan lol!

[integral]

5 minutes ago, bambi said:

Ah perfect, so you are claiming to be more intelligent then him and the whole scientific communtiy on this? Please lecture them with your wisdom, where did you obtain this wisdom?

Do you honeslty think that people are not aware of the limitations of studies, reductivity issues with measurements, confounding variables etc etc? Do you really think these people are that stupid and your so smart?

What is really happening is your pride and ego both envies and resents Bryan lol!

Yes 🙌 that’s exactly what I am, especially the jealously  part.

 

Edited June 18 by integral

[integral]

@bambi let’s imagine a scenario where he dies from unexpected complications. Imagine how that would shatter your paradigm of science. It would be such a shock to your whole world view. You’re thinking sure but it will never happen because he’s so measured. 🤣

but because his sleep is so perfect and his exercise routine is on point and his gut is in perfect working order he can put as much stress as he wants on his body and his body will intelligently manage it for many years to come.

Edited June 18 by integral

[Schizophonia]

On 17/06/2024 at 10:40 AM, undeather said:

Fallostatin blocks the effect of "myostatin" - a protein which is an important modulator of muscle-growth in the body. Meaning that you basically let go of one major hypertrophy-breaks, leading to increased muscle-growth in the process. There are actually people who have a (loss of function)-.mutation in these myostatin decoding genes, which lowers their total levels, and they come out as extraordinarily muscular in the process: 

 

 

Those children, as far as I know, do not suffer from any obvious side effect trade-offs. There are hints however, that it might effect the heart in later stages of life. I don't know what to think about this therapy yet - seems like a risky thing to play with such an important regulator - I would defeinitely not recommend it because I dont see the reward for a potentially life changing risk. But let's stay open minded!

YK11 would work too lol.

[bambi]

12 minutes ago, integral said:

@bambi let’s imagine a scenario where he dies from unexpected complications. Imagine how that would shatter your paradigm of science. It would be such a shock to your whole world view. You’re thinking sure but it will never happen because he’s so measured. 🤣

but because his sleep is so perfect and his exercise routine is on point and his gut is in perfect working order he can put as much stress as he wants on his body and his body will intelligently manage it for many years to come.

Absolutely not, theres risk with any experimental treatment, the gene therapy is risky for example. Other things are less risky. I respect the fact hes putting the work in and not just some armchair philosopher who thinks there super smart in their own mind, but doing nothing in reality to help anyone

[integral]

6 minutes ago, bambi said:

Absolutely not, theres risk with any experimental treatment, the gene therapy is risky for example. Other things are less risky. I respect the fact hes putting the work in and not just some armchair philosopher who thinks there super smart in their own mind, but doing nothing in reality to help anyone

I don’t have $800 million to contribute to science. But in the past I did spend all the money I had (at the time) experimenting.

Like I said I like what he’s doing and I like his personality and I like his message. being critical of parts of what he’s doing is not unreasonable.

[bambi]

21 minutes ago, integral said:

I don’t have $800 million to contribute to science. But in the past I did spend all the money I had (at the time) experimenting.

Like I said I like what he’s doing and I like his personality and I like his message. being critical of parts of what he’s doing is not unreasonable.

No I agree, I disagreed with HgH for thyroid rejuvanation for example. Peptides Thymalin, Thymosin Alpha1 and beta4 are way better choices IMO

 

It just doesnt make sense to me when people shit on others who are at least try to positively develop and help

[integral]

@bambi he’s at version 3 I’m looking forward to seeing how this evolves probably it will look more reasonable at version 10. Where he takes 10 times less supplements lol.

I would’ve liked to of seen what he could achieve with something moderate with his measurement strategy. Drop all the excess and see how far you could take it with just the basics.

This would be useful for 99% of the population instead of telling everyone to take Ashwahanda for the next 60 years. 

[bambi]

39 minutes ago, integral said:

@bambi he’s at version 3 I’m looking forward to seeing how this evolves probably it will look more reasonable at version 10. Where he takes 10 times less supplements lol.

I would’ve liked to of seen what he could achieve with something moderate with his measurement strategy. Drop all the excess and see how far you could take it with just the basics.

This would be useful for 99% of the population instead of telling everyone to take Ashwahanda for the next 60 years. 

Yes, he actually has developed his own supplements so he doesnt take as many pills.

I actually have a similiar protocol to him, I have taken 60+ pills a day.

I have taken a bunch of peptides too (15+), peptides are much more effective to me then vitamins in terms of noticeable change. Peptides are the future of modern health care imo

Ultimately Bryan is just inspirational/motivaitonal in a positive way on health, excercise, lifestyle, sleep, quality of life. I will never 100% agree with anyones personal protocol, but thats minor

[integral]

@bambi is your protocol available online? 

[bambi]

1 hour ago, integral said:

@bambi is your protocol available online? 

No, its just my personal one from my resaerch over the years

I use Cellcore protocol for detoxificaiton and regeneration. (best brand and technology imo)

I have all the usually supplements Johnson does, curciminoids, sulfarephene, coq10, PQQ etc etc (have 50-60 different ones)

I then also take peptides:

Overall healing BPC-157/KPV -> LVLUP health Gi ultimate repair is a great product

Immune peptides: Thymalin, Thymosin alpha 1. thymosin beta 4, also LL-37 for gut antimicrobe in small amounts

Mitochondria peptides: MOTS-C, Humanin-G, SS31

Nerve repair peptide : ARA-290

Doapmine repair peptide - DSNP - 11

Brain health peptides, Pinaelon, Selank, Semax (have considered and resarch cerebrolsyin and Dihexa, but not sold on either of them yet). Also I came close to sourcing ABBV-CLS-7262  molecude from Googles Calico company that is current in trails. China were develpping it but struggled. This compound works on the ISR, helps the immune system find and repair cells that are under stress or damaged, especially in the brain and nervous system. This molecule will be in the market 2027 i think

I am also going to do and use the peptide bioregulators, and I now use LSD/Psyilcybin too as part of my recovery. Will use 5meo malt and dmt shortly

[integral]

@bambi I can see now why you were getting a little frustrated with the people commenting on Bryan!

i’m surprised you don’t have a YouTube channel of your own at this point.

[bambi]

7 minutes ago, integral said:

@bambi I can see now why you were getting a little frustrated with the people commenting on Bryan!

i’m surprised you don’t have a YouTube channel of your own at this point.

LOL I just want to heal from all the abuse I subjected myself to in my 20s

[PsychedelicEagle]

21 hours ago, aurum said:

Are you so sure about your theory that you will go against what the data is showing?

The idea is to weigh measurements with other facts. Biomarkers are just one way of informing oneself. Perhaps a quite reliable one, but not infallible.

21 hours ago, aurum said:

What if we need to do something "unnatural" in order to create optimal human health?

Agreed, this is likely required if we want to optimize health to the extreme. But notice that manipulating highly complex biological systems is not easy. Whenever you decide to go againt nature you are playing at high stakes. Perhaps this is part of Bryan's purpose; if so, that's okay, and his findings will be valuable for humanity. I just wouldn't run the risk myself.

21 hours ago, aurum said:

But where do you draw the line on what is "natural"?

Humans are natural. Humans then created sunscreen. Why is that unnatural? And how do you know that natural is better?

The line is drawn arbitrarily of course. To me, the longer some behavior/food/etc. was present during our evolution, the more natural it is. Therefore I favor whole foods vs supplements, for example. Natural is not strictly better, but the standard deviation tends to be smaller: you are less likely to screw yourself by doing things we evolved doing. So we can say natural is more robust.

Edited June 18 by PsychedelicEagle

[PsychedelicEagle]

10 hours ago, bambi said:

Do you honeslty think that people are not aware of the limitations of studies, reductivity issues with measurements, confounding variables etc etc?

@bambi, I honestly think these issues are not taken as seriously as they should. We live in a society where reductionism and scientism are the norm. Anyway I appreciate what Bryan is doing and I think the gradient is positive: Blueprint helps to move society to a healthier place.

[bambi]

28 minutes ago, PsychedelicEagle said:

@bambi, I honestly think these issues are not taken as seriously as they should. We live in a society where reductionism and scientism are the norm. Anyway I appreciate what Bryan is doing and I think the gradient is positive: Blueprint helps to move society to a healthier place.

He has 5meo dmt tattooed on his arm lol. I think attacking these issues at all levels of our being is a sensible strategy, its not mutually exclusive to me

 

At any given time t, we can only go off the best tools, knowledge and data that we have, what else can we do. Hes clearly in the top 1% of healthy individuals, hes a net positve for society for sure

Edited June 18 by bambi

[Yimpa]

18 minutes ago, bambi said:

He has 5meo dmt tattooed on his arm lol.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Leo had it tattooed on his ass 

[integral]

Update:

[aurum]

2 hours ago, PsychedelicEagle said:

The idea is to weigh measurements with other facts. Biomarkers are just one way of informing oneself. Perhaps a quite reliable one, but not infallible.

Agreed, this is likely required if we want to optimize health to the extreme. But notice that manipulating highly complex biological systems is not easy. Whenever you decide to go againt nature you are playing at high stakes. Perhaps this is part of Bryan's purpose; if so, that's okay, and his findings will be valuable for humanity. I just wouldn't run the risk myself.

The line is drawn arbitrarily of course. To me, the longer some behavior/food/etc. was present during our evolution, the more natural it is. Therefore I favor whole foods vs supplements, for example. Natural is not strictly better, but the standard deviation tends to be smaller: you are less likely to screw yourself by doing things we evolved doing. So we can say natural is more robust.

All good points.

I think we are mostly in agreement. The only point of contention I might have is that there is very little that is still “natural” about human life. And it’s only going to keep becoming more “unnatural” in the future as we keep evolving.

Even those whole foods are GMO’d and grown by industrial agriculture, which people then pickup by car at a grocery store with money. All of this is completely unnatural by most definitions. 

The reality of natural is that much of it sucked so bad that we needed to create unnatural.

[Leo Gura]

"My speed of aging has dropped to 0.64"

This is such BS.